Muay Thai
Shotokan
Krav Maga
Judo
etc

Ever hear some old zen saying that goes 'All things are one and connected'? You ever think it's a load? Me too. But, I realized that those zen guys and gals aren't wrong, they just can't articulate to save their lives.

I never liked hearing 'styles' divided up into categories like the ones above because, for me, it never made sense to do that. No one who developed a set of moves to work on ever said 'Before I do any testing or even theorizing, I only want to use body movements that you use a snapping motion with/ throw a person with/ grapple and pull on their limbs or joints with/ yada yada yada.'

When whoever started developing a particular training regiment, they observed and theorized on what could work and what couldn't. Then they practiced it to see if it did. Plus, even after they incorporated a certain movement or set of moments into their personal repertoire, it didn't change the physics or bio-mechanics behind it.

After all, if you took all 'savate techniques' and called them 'taekwon doe techniques' would that change anything about them? If jiu-jitsu were renamed 'kung-fu' what happens then?

The point of all this is that, when I'm learning unarmed combat, I don't even want moves to be taught as 'ground moves' and 'standing moves' or 'striking moves' and 'grappling moves.' I'd rather see all aspects taught as if they always were part of the same thing, which they are. They're all movements designed to cause an outcome to a situation which you find acceptable.



Thoughts and comments?

<< Thoughts and comments? >>

As a drafter, I earned my living using my hands.
I practice Aikido and Iaido because they are not striking arts.

Welcome David. I am going to have to disagree with you. Some styles were indeed developed with certain parameters in mind that would "limit" them. Some Chinese styles in particular were developed by wealthy folk for exercise/aesthetic purposes, with limited fuctional value.

My philosophy of the martial arts is that we should train in our given art to the best of our ability. Take as much as we can from it and share that knowledge with others.This is a switch in my attitudes from the past. I used to use so much energy bashing other arts I felt were inferior to my own. Then I realized that my own pathetic technique needed more of my energy. Train humble and things work out for the best.
Being middle aged and starting over in the arts is very challenging. It's slowly brought me around to the humbling revelation that I wasn't that great in my past training and that I will never be now.I'm not a has been..I'm a never was. Oh well, this has opened up my eyes and made training much more enjoyable.I'm not burdened with the swollen head that in my past training made me fairly arrogant.Training humble is a reflection of the charactor of my sensei.We just put in the work and everything turns out alright.

Mark

"It's not about the destination, it's about the journey"

I've spent so many years in my martial arts life forgetting this statement. I set myself the goal of reaching blackbelt in my chosen style. But recieving it i felt like i had hit a brick wall. I had concentrated so hard on the stuff i needed to show at my grading that i had forgotten most of the stuff i had learnt before it. So i found myself having to take myself back to basics. Watching the lower grades for reminders.

Couldn't agree more.

I think that is a very modern western view of how fighting styles developed. I'm sure a few early systems did come about like that as well as lots of more modern styles, but many arts were based in social, religious and cultural ideologies and beliefs. A style then should be looked at as the embodiment of an idea, of a philosophy.

Taking a mish-mash approach with no limits as to what you include may sound like a cool idea, but I think many martial artists are making a fundamental error in trying to view MA in this way.
I think many MAists are far too focussed on techniques and look at martial arts as just large catalogues of techniques that you learn and throw together as you see fit in a fight. At this level mish-mash martial arts is fine, but this fails to answer the most important question of any conflict: how do I win?

The mish-mash is like giving 100 men an array of weapons and expecting them to win a battle. They might pull it off, but the chances are it won't be efficient and they will take heavy losses. In my view martial arts are much more about how you win the battle than the weapons you use to fight with. This is where styles become important. The style is the philosophy of conflict and its resolution. The style is your road map to winning the fight. When you forget about styles you are effectively starting from scratch and having to create the strategies that bring victory through trial and error. Furthermore by adding disparate techniques that have no stylistic commonality, you have effectively clogged up your mind with junk.

Its like taking six different jigsaw puzzles and jumbling the pieces in a bag then trying to make a single clear image.

We can do without styles, but if we take time to understand what they truly are the question we end up asking is why would you want to get rid of them?