Yep this is a thing too and it's because MMA has all sorts you can do which is legal including elbowing and shit like that but the throws, takedowns and locks are what often take the people off guard who train in a style but don't take five seconds to look at what other people are doing which is why it's important to study.
I've forgotten who exactly it was but there was a boxer who got humbled quite a bit by this because they thought they were going to absolutely wreck MMA fighters just because they had been training in boxing for so long. What happened was they immediately got taken off their feet so their boxing advantage went out the window. Joe Rogan talked about this quite a lot in his clips too where you'd have people realising "Oh yeah you can go for the legs when you're dealing with guys like that" kind of situation.
It's good to be specialised at something and I practice Shotokan, but it's also a good idea to know what kind of shit you'll be up against out there encountering random people as well and knowing how to deal with it even if it's only the basics.
This is why I don't think we have a true martial art in the US, and one would actually be useful.
The purpose behind the martial arts in Japan was because the peasants couldn't carry swords and had to rely on hand-to-hand, or improvised weapon training.
I feel like a good martial art for the modern era would include weaponized environments, multiple attackers, and uneven or obstructed ground. You still need to learn the basics, but specializing in one particular "form" of fighting defeats the purpose of a martial art.
It depends entirely on the style and how it's taught, good teachers know the styles really well and the old styles do in fact have a variety of techniques based around this. A lot of people don't know this and misinterpret Shotokan moves badly especially the kata as a result and think the movements are pointless.
Right up until the point they try using them with weapons or use certain techniques for wrestling, takedowns and joint locks. As an example because I know about Shotokan, you can in fact do lots of the kata using either Tonfa or Sai and it makes perfect sense. A lot of the blocking methods are in fact taken from sword styles as well based on what direction you block in with a katana so that can be translated to weapons as well.
Many moves in Shotokan kata as well are bonafide wrestling or grappling techniques. I've chatted to people on youtube about this and made the point and they think that because you have to adjust them to make them work for their situations that makes it wrong. No it's the exact opposite, it's going back to the true roots of the technique the styles often get completely butchered by westerners.
If a style doesn't have this kind of history to it, either the teachers are shit and are just making it up and don't know what they're doing, or it's a made up style.
Yep this is a thing too and it's because MMA has all sorts you can do which is legal including elbowing and shit like that but the throws, takedowns and locks are what often take the people off guard who train in a style but don't take five seconds to look at what other people are doing which is why it's important to study.
I've forgotten who exactly it was but there was a boxer who got humbled quite a bit by this because they thought they were going to absolutely wreck MMA fighters just because they had been training in boxing for so long. What happened was they immediately got taken off their feet so their boxing advantage went out the window. Joe Rogan talked about this quite a lot in his clips too where you'd have people realising "Oh yeah you can go for the legs when you're dealing with guys like that" kind of situation.
It's good to be specialised at something and I practice Shotokan, but it's also a good idea to know what kind of shit you'll be up against out there encountering random people as well and knowing how to deal with it even if it's only the basics.
This is why I don't think we have a true martial art in the US, and one would actually be useful.
The purpose behind the martial arts in Japan was because the peasants couldn't carry swords and had to rely on hand-to-hand, or improvised weapon training.
I feel like a good martial art for the modern era would include weaponized environments, multiple attackers, and uneven or obstructed ground. You still need to learn the basics, but specializing in one particular "form" of fighting defeats the purpose of a martial art.
It depends entirely on the style and how it's taught, good teachers know the styles really well and the old styles do in fact have a variety of techniques based around this. A lot of people don't know this and misinterpret Shotokan moves badly especially the kata as a result and think the movements are pointless.
Right up until the point they try using them with weapons or use certain techniques for wrestling, takedowns and joint locks. As an example because I know about Shotokan, you can in fact do lots of the kata using either Tonfa or Sai and it makes perfect sense. A lot of the blocking methods are in fact taken from sword styles as well based on what direction you block in with a katana so that can be translated to weapons as well.
Many moves in Shotokan kata as well are bonafide wrestling or grappling techniques. I've chatted to people on youtube about this and made the point and they think that because you have to adjust them to make them work for their situations that makes it wrong. No it's the exact opposite, it's going back to the true roots of the technique the styles often get completely butchered by westerners.
If a style doesn't have this kind of history to it, either the teachers are shit and are just making it up and don't know what they're doing, or it's a made up style.