Traditional Schools Hit Hard?

[Areios]

I think MMA demolished many of the myths that surrounded Asian martial arts in the West. The general public realised that:
I have a wider question. Will MMA replace Boxing as a spectator sport?

They seem to hit a very similar psychographic and demographic.

I don't think so. It's going to get more popular because many of the older gen are watching boxing, but for many people the grapplin side is boring. So I think they end up with K1.

[grzegorz]

I think MMA demolished many of the myths that surrounded Asian martial arts in the West. The general public realised that:
I have a wider question. Will MMA replace Boxing as a spectator sport?

They seem to hit a very similar psychographic and demographic.

I don't think so. It's going to get more popular because many of the older gen are watching boxing, but for many people the grapplin side is boring. So I think they end up with K1.

It's interesting I know in most of Europe kickboxers are seen as "ultimate fighters" but in the States kickboxing never really took off. I mean it's respected and it's around but it hasn't really captured American imaginations. Basically kickboxing is boring to watch for non-martial artists (here )because it just doesn't seem realistic.

I think it's because wrestling and football are so big in the States in school so when we see someone getting kicked we think, "Why not just tackle the guy?" This is why MMA is so big here because this is what Americans see as a one on one fight where two people really want to hurt each other. It's going to involve strikes, takedowns/throws and ground fighting. It's not going to stop just because one guy goes down.

I suppose the reality is maybe TMAs haven't so much been hit hard as much as MMAs have pushed the popularity of martial arts to a new level in the States. I know Pak Vic used to say years ago that the next great martial art is going to come from the States. Perhaps this is it...

[Areios]

Hmmm... strange to hear that. Here every one wants to see big punches and brutal head kicks no pushing around. I don't know why this is, maybe from the karate bumm we in europe stayed in a stand up fighting minde set. MMA is not so popular because many people thinks it's barbaric and have no style at all. And if I look on european MMA that would be almost right. (but defenetly here in hungary)

[bartekb]

I know Pak Vic used to say years ago that the next great martial art is going to come from the States

To be honest I think that what people understood by martial artist is gone completelly now - and americans did give the world the next great martial art - it includes intelligent missles:)
is Simo Hayha the finn sniper martial artist?

[Interloper]

I know Pak Vic used to say years ago that the next great martial art is going to come from the States

To be honest I think that what people understood by martial artist is gone completelly now - and americans did give the world the next great martial art - it includes intelligent missles:)
is Simo Hayha the finn sniper martial artist?

bartekb,
You sound very pessimistic.
Intelligent missiles are for warfare. Warfare and martial arts are not the same thing. Martial arts had their roots in hand-to-hand combat, but have moved on to become the art and science of fighting hand-to-hand and with (usually) non-firearm weapons as in days of old.

There are many things (outside of the martial arts) that are considered obsolete, where once they were the skills that were depended on for survival, yet people continue to practice those things as artforms or personal disciplines today. For example, horseracing and the art and science of breeding fast horses. Why do we need fast horses in our post-industrial and industrial societies when we have automobiles and motorcycles?

[bartekb]

Martial arts had their roots in hand-to-hand combat

We can agree to disagree. People used weapons whenever they could - if they could they preferred spears to swords and as soon as firearms were accessible they chosen firearms over spears. Martial arts come from bodyguards and soldiers - those guys wanted to stay alive. I know no single historical martial art that did not have weapons whenever possible - even pankration - sport in its nature used hard leather gloves.
What i try to practice those days I consider to be a skill - jutsu - not an art. The only reason to practice today is for the pleasure of practice - if I was concerned about self defence I would buy a gun:)
Actually if you ask around you'll see that martial arts guys are attacked much more often than normal folks that sometimes just decide not to go to shitty places and act cocky. For self defence its best to stay home:)

Why do we need fast horses

No idea - I would leave the horses alone:) They are as fast as mother nature needs them to be:)

[Chris McKinley]

I think you're both wrong, at least on two small points. Martial arts are still about hand-to-hand combat, whatever else they may have become and whether they want to be or not, and buying a gun does not constitute self-defense.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming....

[bartekb]

Martial arts are still about hand-to-hand combat

When I was 16 we used to go to the cellars in our multi storey compounds and steal valves that when carried properly granted you with a fist of death punch:) This could save you months of conditioning and building power:)

Martial arts are still about hand-to-hand combat

Martial arts now are about either sport or preservance of tradition or maintainig the false illusion of being prepared to some aspects of your life like a violent attack. I think they have been about something else before the gunpowder:)

buying a gun does not constitute self-defense

you still need to pull the trigger
but probably for a hand-hand distance I would buy a knife

as for the topic - Im glad that traditional MA are hit hard - I wish they were hit much harder - I ve seen several boxing schools and they all taught you to fight wihout even boasting about it, and Ive seen plenty of "traditional" schools that tought people just bad habits. There are still people out there believing that taichi takes at least 1o years before you can use it in practice - but then oooh..you would be much better than those MMA guys and much more spiritual to bother to check it:)

[Chris McKinley]

RE: "Martial arts now are about either sport or preservance of tradition or maintainig the false illusion of being prepared to some aspects of your life like a violent attack.". The false illusion? Yeah, I'd say that about sums up what you can expect from 99% of the martial arts offered out there, including CMA/IMA. While that's unfortunate, it isn't the case 100% of the time. I train/teach people for precisely that kind of preparation, and the training has been tested and proven.

RE: "you still need to pull the trigger but probably for a hand-hand distance I would buy a knife". bartekb, you're still missing the point. It doesn't matter whether you buy a gun, a knife, or a grenade. That still doesn't constitute complete or even adequate self-defense. It's an ignorant notion that's common among martial artists that simply having a gun trumps everything and renders unarmed skills no longer necessary.

[Interloper]

I think you're both wrong, at least on two small points. Martial arts are still about hand-to-hand combat, whatever else they may have become and whether they want to be or not, and buying a gun does not constitute self-defense.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming....

Where did I say that martial arts weren't still about hand-to-hand combat? Of course they are. The focus is just different than that of their battlefield (or courtly) predecessors' purposes. The need for effectiveness when practiced as an art is also no less important than it was as a battlefield technical application. Martial arts can't be truly authentic without being efficacious, so we strive to make them as effective as we can. Not because we need to kill an enemy (though self-defense is a common purpose) but because we don't want to waste our time practicing a hollow shell that makes a farce out of the art.

We practice the art and science of fighting, with the aim of doing so as effectively as though we really were fixin' to kill the enemy.

[bartekb]

Interloper is right - you practice with the context in mind but the context is not existant anymore in real life - maybe some small part of it still is.

I train/teach people for precisely that kind of preparation, and the training has been tested and proven.

You can be a thai boxing world champion working as a security expert and still be stabbed to death on your home staircase- as it happened in Poland few years ago.
There are systems more or less working as a preparation for those types of encounters but at least amongs civilians its selling people an illusion that fear of being attacked will be gone when you master some MA tricks - but the problem is not in the lack of MA knowledge - the fear is the problem.

It's an ignorant notion that's common among martial artists that simply having a gun trumps everything and renders unarmed skills no longer necessary.

Simply having a knife renders 99% of unarmed skill useless - this has been tested and proven quite well. There has been many documented tests unarmed vs knife - Im sure you are aware of it.

[JusticeZero]

Sure - IF you have the knife readily at hand in spite of security/culture/whatever, AND the situation calls for that level of response, AND you are psychologically able to hack into the other guy without going hesitant at the body horror, then the knife will usually trump stuff. But that's an awful lot of ifs. For everything else, there's unarmed.
Guns are even more situational than knives are. You'd have to be an idiot to bring a gun to a knife fight for instance.

[bartekb]

Sure - IF you have the knife readily at hand in spite of security/culture/whatever, AND the situation calls for that level of response, AND you are psychologically able to hack into the other guy without going hesitant at the body horror, then the knife will usually trump stuff. But that's an awful lot of ifs. For everything else, there's unarmed.

To attack properly with your fist - its ok IF you conditioned your hands, IF situation called for this level of response (for example according to the law in Poland a trained boxer is treated as an armed person when using fists) IF you are psychologically able to beat someones teeth out or maybe even kill them when their head hits the pavement, so a lot of ifs. And on top of this you can just carry a small metal pipe - those are legal, no need to fajin training

[ashe]

i think it's time for this topic to move to BTDT...

[Juan]

Article from Inside Kung Fu talking about this very subject:

http://www.insidekung-fu.com/content/view/121/36/