PDA

View Full Version : You can choose two forms of martial arts...



Wasteland
06-05-08, 2:53 pm
If you were planning on competing, which two? Naturally, many would consider one stand up and one grappling approach. Which ones? Or maybe you'd choose two stand up or two grappling?

J Wong
06-05-08, 4:44 pm
When I start MMA in the future, I plan to do muy thai and BJJ.

TheBassGuy
06-06-08, 7:14 pm
I started off wrestling. Then when I started training for MMA I started focusing on Muay Thai and BJJ.

bobbymart
06-07-08, 2:51 pm
When I start MMA in the future, I plan to do muy thai and BJJ.

these two along with wrestling will make you well rounded in my opinion not much you can't accomplish!

Maharg
06-07-08, 7:38 pm
Wrestling and BJJ. Just get them on the ground and get them submitted. Would of course work on hands.

If not that combo, kick boxing and wrestling. Taught leg kicks, hands, and take downs and take down defense.

k1usa
06-07-08, 7:47 pm
First you come to San Francisco to the Fairtex Muay Thai camp...train there for a year...then head down to San Jose and train with Frank Shamrock....bestof both worlds....and if you have time...stop over to Cung Le's gym...take on some Sansho for kicks...


this was my son's journey...and it did him just fine...

bobbymart
06-08-08, 6:10 pm
sounds pretty good is you'r son fighting, K1USA?

mjsef88
06-09-08, 10:38 am
Muay Thai and Wrestling with a focus on submissions.

Heavy kicks/punches/elbows/knees with the ground style to add on.

dominatetheiron
06-09-08, 10:55 am
not sure how many people know how much about MMA or if they are just spectators of the sport. I have several friends who are up and coming in this new and exciting world and some of them have contract offers from KOTC and K1 and ufc scouts looking them up i train with them and am a part of this world also i am trained by a 5th degree black belt and a 7th degree black belt which both came from the school of Bruce Lee's number one student so they know a thing or two.

I wrestle so that part came easy to me wrestling is huge in this sport especially if you understand the leverage and push and pull actions and how to use someones weight and momentum against them.

My advice is learn everything from every discipline you can. In the MMA world today if your not a complete fighter your weaknesses will be exploited and you will get a beat down in a hurry.

I train boxing, wrestling, BJJ, Judo, Tai kwon Do, Akido, karate, anything that can help you is a must as far as if you want to focus on a few i would say your best bet is Wrestling, BJJ, and judo. Muay Thai boxing has also helped develop some phenominal fighters there just isnt a suitable area to train it where i am. I am slightly biased toward BJJ though. good luck.

Cstlfx
06-09-08, 11:24 am
Kenpo and Muay Thai. I'm not much for the ground game, never found it all that exciting to watch or participate in. Plus, if I learn a martial art, I want to learn something that can aid me in a life threatening situation. The ground is never a good place to be in a street fight, therefore I dont want to get comfortable going there.

But, thats just my opinion. But I think many can agree that Muay Thai is one of the best, if not the best martial art to know for MMA. How many people have been knocked out or TKO'd by elbows or knees?

Wasteland
06-09-08, 11:47 am
Muay Thai and Wrestling with a focus on submissions.

Heavy kicks/punches/elbows/knees with the ground style to add on.

Looks like many chose muay thai as the stand up component.

Wrestling provides an incredible conditioning and strength base for sure. If you can re-teach certain elements of it, certain elements which are fundamental to wrestliing but antithetical to the ground game and submissions, it would make for a great foundation.

mjsef88
06-09-08, 1:21 pm
Looks like many chose muay thai as the stand up component.

Wrestling provides an incredible conditioning and strength base for sure. If you can re-teach certain elements of it, certain elements which are fundamental to wrestliing but antithetical to the ground game and submissions, it would make for a great foundation.

Right, thats why I didn't get into certain styles, like greco roman, etc. I think just knowing how to squirm out of/hold someone down is fundamental. From there you can go on with your strong ground game, weather it be submissions or ground pounding.

Wasteland
06-09-08, 1:27 pm
Right, thats why I didn't get into certain styles, like greco roman, etc. I think just knowing how to squirm out of/hold someone down is fundamental. From there you can go on with your strong ground game, weather it be submissions or ground pounding.

I have known several wrestlers who were state champs and, pound for pound, they were incredibly strong--not just the "lifting" kind of strong, but the core strength kind that really benefits a grappler.

T-EST
06-09-08, 6:44 pm
Wrestling and Aikido... You guys might think..B.S. Wrestling is just hardcore training, cardio and most importantly unstoppable takedowns. And Aikido is just great for balance and using another persons energy against themselves. You can be the striker in the world but once a clinch happens welcome to my world.

bobbymart
06-09-08, 7:20 pm
Wrestling and Aikido... You guys might think..B.S. Wrestling is just hardcore training, cardio and most importantly unstoppable takedowns. And Aikido is just great for balance and using another persons energy against themselves. You can be the striker in the world but once a clinch happens welcome to my world.

I lerned hwo to handle my self in a clinch from mui thai. wrestling is great for balance and ground controll.

T-EST
06-10-08, 12:27 am
Most definetly the actual Thai-Clinch is a dominant position(Anderson Silva killed Rich Franklin). But while you're seting up for a barrage of knees, Im flipping you through the air. It can go either way... depending on the training of actual fighters.

Cstlfx
06-10-08, 1:41 am
I dont mean to take this thread in a different direction but this is almost what I wanted to discuss. MMA is great, and I love to watch it, but is a martial art superior to the other?

I really wish they'd bring back a version of the Old UFC. I want to see master versus master of different martial arts. Cause I remember when those guys got in the ring, like when Royce Gracie got in there and took guys on.

So, is a martial art better than another? Or is would a martial art suit a person better, thus only making a person better than another?

bobbymart
06-10-08, 1:54 am
I dont mean to take this thread in a different direction but this is almost what I wanted to discuss. MMA is great, and I love to watch it, but is a martial art superior to the other?

I really wish they'd bring back a version of the Old UFC. I want to see master versus master of different martial arts. Cause I remember when those guys got in the ring, like when Royce Gracie got in there and took guys on.

So, is a martial art better than another? Or is would a martial art suit a person better, thus only making a person better than another?

it's a fact that in mma jiu jitsu and mui thai have won more fights than any other styles most mma school rely on these two techniques to teach there students now there are the accesptions like chuck lidell who uses hawiian kenpo and that cat that just beat tito.... machida there are the acception like them but mui thai and jiu jitsu have been the dominate forces in mma, when is tha last time you have seen an mma match won with tae kwon do? it is subission (bjj) or kicks knee's and elbows (mui thai). wresling has it's place when it comes to ground controll but good bjj schools teach that.

Cstlfx
06-10-08, 2:11 am
it's a fact that in mma jiu jitsu and mui thai have won more fights than any other styles most mma school rely on these two techniques to teach there students now there are the accesptions like chuck lidell who uses hawiian kenpo and that cat that just beat tito.... machida there are the acception like them but mui thai and jiu jitsu have been the dominate forces in mma, when is tha last time you have seen an mma match won with tae kwon do? it is subission (bjj) or kicks knee's and elbows (mui thai). wresling has it's place when it comes to ground controll but good bjj schools teach that.

Thats what I mean, I'm wondering about style vs. style. A guy with a black belt in both Muay Thai and BJJ can go very far in the MMA sport. I do not disagree with that. But what if you put say a Gracie up against a Muay Thai master, which would prevail? Thats what I've been pondering.

Someone who has grown accustom to grappling in MMA feels somewhat decent in a clinch, but if you take a muay thai master, face him against say a tae kwon do master, would a clinch occur? I'm not looking at mixed martial arts, but a tournament of sorts, that mixes the martial arts in one ring. If you can understand what I'm saying.

Each style has its weakness, but each also has a strength. I'm just highly curious as to if there is the best martial art. If you have someone who only trains one martial art, versus someone who only trains another.

bobbymart
06-10-08, 2:18 am
Thats what I mean, I'm wondering about style vs. style. A guy with a black belt in both Muay Thai and BJJ can go very far in the MMA sport. I do not disagree with that. But what if you put say a Gracie up against a Muay Thai master, which would prevail? Thats what I've been pondering.

Someone who has grown accustom to grappling in MMA feels somewhat decent in a clinch, but if you take a muay thai master, face him against say a tae kwon do master, would a clinch occur? I'm not looking at mixed martial arts, but a tournament of sorts, that mixes the martial arts in one ring. If you can understand what I'm saying.

Each style has its weakness, but each also has a strength. I'm just highly curious as to if there is the best martial art. If you have someone who only trains one martial art, versus someone who only trains another.

those match ups have been taking place in mma it depend on the individual as opposed to the style if the mui thai guy catches the bjj guy the mui thai guy wins if the bjj guy gets the mui thai guy down he wins that's how it goes with striking arts in general against bjj now if you go tae kwon do vs mui that or akido against karate so on that's where the debate begins I personaly like mui thai and from everything I have seen that is what reigns supreme again the are the acceptions but generaly I think Mui thai dominates it's hard to block a kick that can break bone (shamrock vs kung lee)

Northman
06-10-08, 4:42 pm
There is one martial art not mentioned here that I think needs to be. Since the discussion has moved from what is best in the ring to what single "style" (I hate to use the word) would be most applicable in a real life situation I would have to say Krav Maga.

mjsef88
06-10-08, 4:47 pm
There is one martial art not mentioned here that I think needs to be. Since the discussion has moved from what is best in the ring to what single "style" (I hate to use the word) would be most applicable in a real life situation I would have to say Krav Maga.

Krav Maga was alot of fun to learn and teach (basic principles). In my opinion, it isn't really useful for MMA. Krav Maga is all about self defense. It's about killing/maiming a person who is trying to hurt you (in real life, not a ring). But i'm just trying to steer the conversation back on course.

...and to take it off course again....In the real world, haha, krav maga is what i've used in dodgy situations.

....and back on course....It should really be restated that no two styles will guarentee you victory. I've been trained in 10-12 styles, and use what works for me (like in lifting). That way you learn, adapt, and overcome your flaws and expose your opponents. But I know this thread was just started for fun and conversation.

Wasteland
06-10-08, 5:06 pm
I lerned hwo to handle my self in a clinch from mui thai. wrestling is great for balance and ground controll.

Wrestling is definitely great for ground control, overall strength, conditioning and balance, but not necessarily for submissions.

Wasteland
06-10-08, 5:08 pm
I dont mean to take this thread in a different direction but this is almost what I wanted to discuss. MMA is great, and I love to watch it, but is a martial art superior to the other?

I really wish they'd bring back a version of the Old UFC. I want to see master versus master of different martial arts. Cause I remember when those guys got in the ring, like when Royce Gracie got in there and took guys on.

So, is a martial art better than another? Or is would a martial art suit a person better, thus only making a person better than another?

It all depends on what you're looking to do. Compete in a non-contact kind of way? Compete in a full contact kind of way? For an outlet or for meditation?

Definitely, I think there are some body types that are better suited for certain forms of martial arts. Same could be said for most sports.

Wasteland
06-10-08, 5:10 pm
Krav Maga was alot of fun to learn and teach (basic principles). In my opinion, it isn't really useful for MMA.

I agree. KM is great for self-defense, but may not be suitable for MMA.

bobbymart
06-10-08, 5:27 pm
I have to give props to km it is good inflict the most damage as fast as possible.

Cstlfx
06-10-08, 11:53 pm
Definitely, I think there are some body types that are better suited for certain forms of martial arts. Same could be said for most sports.

Speaking of which, I have short legs (I'm 5' 8", but my in seem is 29", hahahaha) is there a MA that would more benefit my build (stocky, the "lumberjack build")? My body type is great for lifting, but I have no idea about a martial art.

bobbymart
06-11-08, 12:24 pm
I dont agree that there are certain body types suited for certain martial art's types I know short stalky guyst that dominate at bjj and mui thai, I htink is like lifting you can't let you'r "body type" limit you just train hard and skill will come.

Wasteland
06-11-08, 12:45 pm
Speaking of which, I have short legs (I'm 5' 8", but my in seem is 29", hahahaha) is there a MA that would more benefit my build (stocky, the "lumberjack build")? My body type is great for lifting, but I have no idea about a martial art.


I dont agree that there are certain body types suited for certain martial art's types I know short stalky guyst that dominate at bjj and mui thai, I htink is like lifting you can't let you'r "body type" limit you just train hard and skill will come.

Judo maybe? Low center of gravity.

I agree with you bobbymart in that you can be good or very good at any martial arts, regardless of body type. I was just saying that having a specific one might make it easier and be more advantageous, especially at the world class level. It's like saying you can be a great running back at 5'1" and weighin in at 150 pounds, but you'd probably have a hard time playing pro ball, as opposed to the guy who is over 5'6" and weighs over 200 pounds. Or, it's hard being a jockey riding Big Brown if you were 6'6" and weighed 250 pounds.

ironshaolin
06-12-08, 10:46 am
Thats what I mean, I'm wondering about style vs. style. A guy with a black belt in both Muay Thai and BJJ can go very far in the MMA sport. I do not disagree with that. But what if you put say a Gracie up against a Muay Thai master, which would prevail? Thats what I've been pondering.

Someone who has grown accustom to grappling in MMA feels somewhat decent in a clinch, but if you take a muay thai master, face him against say a tae kwon do master, would a clinch occur? I'm not looking at mixed martial arts, but a tournament of sorts, that mixes the martial arts in one ring. If you can understand what I'm saying.

Each style has its weakness, but each also has a strength. I'm just highly curious as to if there is the best martial art. If you have someone who only trains one martial art, versus someone who only trains another.

That's exactly what the early days of UFC were, 2 opponents from different styles, no time limit, no rules. What ended up happening, was nobody knew how to defend against takedowns, and NOBODY knew how to grapple. Next thing you know, joyce gracie comes in and demolishes everyone, so then they realized that maybe cross training is necessary. Now, MMA has grown into a combination of only boxing, kickboxing, wrestling, and BJJ. Good arts, but in my opinion, not necessary. There are NO superior martial arts, only superior martial artists. Every art has strengths and weaknesses, its about how the practitioner learns to exploit those strenghts, and defend the weaknesses. If you are training for the cage, the best thing I think to do is to figure out what you're good at, and perfect it. Look at Chuck Lidell, does he know how to grapple? Yes. Does he? Rarely. His takedown defense is too good, and he knows he's a standup slugger, so thats what he does. The way I see, a punch is a punch, and a kick is a kick. The art you study is inconsequential. What you need to do is see what fits into what you want. A school that focuses on self defense may not be good for the ring, as self defense places an emphasis on eye gouges, groin and throat strikes, all illegal in the cage.
Find a gym or dojo that focuses on BASICS; good punching and kicking skills, one that does alot of sparring as you'll need the practice. Then decide if you want to incorporate grappling into your training. If no, I'd suggest sparring with partners who do, so you get the feel of someone constantly trying to take you down, so you learn to defend it.

bobbymart
06-14-08, 4:00 pm
That's exactly what the early days of UFC were, 2 opponents from different styles, no time limit, no rules. What ended up happening, was nobody knew how to defend against takedowns, and NOBODY knew how to grapple. Next thing you know, joyce gracie comes in and demolishes everyone, so then they realized that maybe cross training is necessary. Now, MMA has grown into a combination of only boxing, kickboxing, wrestling, and BJJ. Good arts, but in my opinion, not necessary. There are NO superior martial arts, only superior martial artists. Every art has strengths and weaknesses, its about how the practitioner learns to exploit those strenghts, and defend the weaknesses. If you are training for the cage, the best thing I think to do is to figure out what you're good at, and perfect it. Look at Chuck Lidell, does he know how to grapple? Yes. Does he? Rarely. His takedown defense is too good, and he knows he's a standup slugger, so thats what he does. The way I see, a punch is a punch, and a kick is a kick. The art you study is inconsequential. What you need to do is see what fits into what you want. A school that focuses on self defense may not be good for the ring, as self defense places an emphasis on eye gouges, groin and throat strikes, all illegal in the cage.
Find a gym or dojo that focuses on BASICS; good punching and kicking skills, one that does alot of sparring as you'll need the practice. Then decide if you want to incorporate grappling into your training. If no, I'd suggest sparring with partners who do, so you get the feel of someone constantly trying to take you down, so you learn to defend it.

good post bro I train BJJ and mui thai primarily but those are the two i'm good at but I look at all sides of martial arts and take things from them to make myself well rounded Chuck lidell does a lot of hawiian kenpo because of Hackelman but you bet you'r ass he train with bjj guys and wrestlers to know what to do if he gets into a sticky situation hence his "get up and throw and uper cut" that he does so well.

ironshaolin
06-16-08, 10:53 pm
Its also an understanding of what the purpose of your art is. My black belt is in Kempo Jiu-jistu, but I have alot of experience in shaolin kung fu, red dragon jiu jitsu, BJJ, muay thai, traditional okinowan karate, escrima. They all have different aspects, strengths and weaknesses. I'm pretty sure that if you threw me in a cage with someone who focuses on cage fighting, there's a good chance I'll get my ass kicked, although be damn sure I do everything I can to sting him on the way down. Throw me against the same fighter in a dark alley, and he might be surprised when he takes me down and ends up with a finger knuckle deep in his eye socket. Followed by a quick open hand strike to the throat, and a shot to the groin and you can put any MMA fighter out. However, that stuff dosen't fly in the ring. ITs about who's game are you playing.
I like to go on Bruce Lee's maxim, discard that which is useless, keep that which is useful.

bobbymart
06-29-08, 5:30 pm
Its also an understanding of what the purpose of your art is. My black belt is in Kempo Jiu-jistu, but I have alot of experience in shaolin kung fu, red dragon jiu jitsu, BJJ, muay thai, traditional okinowan karate, escrima. They all have different aspects, strengths and weaknesses. I'm pretty sure that if you threw me in a cage with someone who focuses on cage fighting, there's a good chance I'll get my ass kicked, although be damn sure I do everything I can to sting him on the way down. Throw me against the same fighter in a dark alley, and he might be surprised when he takes me down and ends up with a finger knuckle deep in his eye socket. Followed by a quick open hand strike to the throat, and a shot to the groin and you can put any MMA fighter out. However, that stuff dosen't fly in the ring. ITs about who's game are you playing.
I like to go on Bruce Lee's maxim, discard that which is useless, keep that which is useful.


good post bro! although you probably agree that the average MMA fighter could probably handle himself in the streets pretty well. not as well as if that is all he trained for but pretty well.

ThaiFighter
08-02-08, 12:33 pm
at my gym we train in a variety of both grappling and stand up. Grappling is mostly shambo however we train moves from BJJ, judo, shooto and wrestling. for stand up its mostly thai however we train in boxing and kali also. sure you can have two styles but we get a mixture of many different styles which is nice. went into a grappling tournament and placed 3rd overall for my weight class. and i won by using a throw taken from judo. the other cat was strictly a BJJ guy so he didnt know how to defend against it. so having a mixture of different styles to best.

need2getBIG
08-02-08, 12:49 pm
i already have a little bit of a wrestling background so i would probably go for bjj and for stand up probably kickboxing

machineman
08-08-08, 8:52 pm
Hey guys...Great posts!! I train in Aikido and Japanese Jujitsu. It is different from BJJ in that our dojo incorporates small joint manipulation, throws and pretty much anything you can think of. We have a cage in the club to train in. I have NO aspirations of fighting in a cage, but I train in it all the time. It is someplace that I am not real comfortable in, so it makes me adapt and overcome.

I think whoever said that there is no best martial art but the best martial artist said it right. I was in a tournament at the end of July and there were many different styles and schools represented. After talking with many of the competitors, we all were there for the same reason....to help MMA and Jujitsu grow in the Midwest.

shizz702
08-08-08, 9:16 pm
muay thai and jiu jitsu. That way I'd be lethal both standing up and on the ground. Best of both worlds in my opinion.

ThaiFighter
08-19-08, 2:20 am
machine where in the midwest did you compete?

machineman
08-19-08, 7:49 am
TF....For the time being, I do 2 comps a year.....NAGA at the Arnold Classic and our club along with another club in town put on our own grappling event at the end of July every year. It is held here in Toledo, Ohio.....

Medford
07-18-09, 10:23 pm
I've taken krav maga, traditional okinawan karate, and kempo

big gap in the ground game though

Jburz
08-03-09, 5:59 pm
Kyokushin and BJJ- Kyokushin if tought under proper senseis,shihans,or sempeis, you will be a great standup fighter in punches and kicks, if one then takes jujitsu they can work on the ground pretty well. Georges St. Peirre 2 main styles are still kyokushin and BJJ ( Ive seen training videos and he still does well known drills from kykoushin and still bows the formal kyokushin way before training)

Girevik 69
06-13-10, 11:24 am
I dont mean to take this thread in a different direction but this is almost what I wanted to discuss. MMA is great, and I love to watch it, but is a martial art superior to the other?

I really wish they'd bring back a version of the Old UFC. I want to see master versus master of different martial arts. Cause I remember when those guys got in the ring, like when Royce Gracie got in there and took guys on.

So, is a martial art better than another? Or is would a martial art suit a person better, thus only making a person better than another?


The UFC used to be a "Style vs. Style" competition in the early days, but that changed as soon as everyone started cross-training. Stikers started training in grappling, and that forced grapplers to cross-train in striking. The end result was that the UFC went from being a no-holds-barred (NHB) competition, to being mixed martial arts (MMA)--something akin to the Ancient Greek pankration.


Thats what I mean, I'm wondering about style vs. style. A guy with a black belt in both Muay Thai and BJJ can go very far in the MMA sport. I do not disagree with that. But what if you put say a Gracie up against a Muay Thai master, which would prevail? Thats what I've been pondering.

If you're talking about a pure striker against a pure grappler, the grappler will win, more often than not. This was proven not only in early UFC competition, but also over 100 years ago, in the "mixed matches" between boxers and wrestlers & judoka/jujutsuka, that were held in England, America, Cuba, and Brazil.

Girevik 69
06-13-10, 11:30 am
There is one martial art not mentioned here that I think needs to be. Since the discussion has moved from what is best in the ring to what single "style" (I hate to use the word) would be most applicable in a real life situation I would have to say Krav Maga.


With all due respect, Krav Maga is nothing special at all. Krav Maga is simply yet another variation of modern military combatives (other examples would be the "Defendu" used by British Commandos during WWII, as well as methods taught in the USMC by Lt. Col. A.J. Drexel Biddle and his student, John Styers, during the pre-War and WWII periods). The amount of hand-to-hand (HTH) training that modern soldiers get is both simple, and minimal, because modern conflicts are fought with modern weapons, not bare fists.

Krav Maga has a formidable reputation only because it is a product of the Israeli military. Folks think to themselves, "If the I.D.F. uses it, it must be good", without considering that the I.D.F. got its reputation by using UZI submachine guns and Merkava tanks, not by fighting it out HTH.

BryanSmash!
06-14-10, 2:57 am
The amount of hand-to-hand (HTH) training that modern soldiers get is both simple, and minimal, because modern conflicts are fought with modern weapons, not bare fists.


Just thought I would chime in and respectfully offer my 2 cents here as it applies to the US military. Combatives training for us has come a long way over the years and is at it's peak for pre-mobilization training right now. I trained as a Level 1 (the lowest) Krav Maga instructor back in 2005 for my first tour and was impressed by it's simplicity and effectiveness, two things that are important when you consider large scale combatives training.
Although we do tend to fight modern conflicts with modern weapons, enemy tactics are generally extremely low tech on the battlefield. Also, interpersonal communications while attempting to win 'the hearts and minds' are more important than ever these days, which tends to put our soldiers right in the thick of things, where the possibility of using hand to hand fighting becomes relatively common.
All this of course is applicable only to real world situations, and although I am an advocate for Krav Maga training as it relates to the military, I feel it has no place in the MMA ring.

Girevik 69
06-15-10, 9:40 am
Just thought I would chime in and respectfully offer my 2 cents here as it applies to the US military. Combatives training for us has come a long way over the years and is at it's peak for pre-mobilization training right now. I trained as a Level 1 (the lowest) Krav Maga instructor back in 2005 for my first tour and was impressed by it's simplicity and effectiveness, two things that are important when you consider large scale combatives training.
Although we do tend to fight modern conflicts with modern weapons, enemy tactics are generally extremely low tech on the battlefield. Also, interpersonal communications while attempting to win 'the hearts and minds' are more important than ever these days, which tends to put our soldiers right in the thick of things, where the possibility of using hand to hand fighting becomes relatively common.
All this of course is applicable only to real world situations, and although I am an advocate for Krav Maga training as it relates to the military, I feel it has no place in the MMA ring.


Bryan,

I genuinely appreciate your input on this subject, but I must respectfully disagree with several of the points you raised above. Modern military combatives have always been rather problematic, because modern soldiers simply cannot devote the time to train in a true, comprehensive system of HTH combat. That being the case, everything about modern military combatives is a rather severe compromise.

I also question many of the techniques of modern military combatives. Take, for example, the knife fighting section of U.S. Army Field Manual 3-25.150: the on-guard stance is completely impractical, if not downright dangerous, with the fighter leading with the unarmed side. With such a stance, the fighter's reach with the knife is severely compromised, and the free hand/forearm is open to slashes by the opponent. In the knife-against-knife sequence, both combatants are shown in a crouch, "leading" with their heads, and thus leaving their faces and necks dangerously exposed.

The bayonet section of the manual isn't much better. In the description of the basic bayonet thrust, no provision is made for angling the rifle/bayonet, so that the flat of the blade is parallel with the ground (which is done to facilitate slipping the blade between ribs).

Of course, the biggest problem with modern bayonet technique is that actual fencing with the rifle/bayonet is no longer taught; instead, we have the travesty known as "pugil stick", which may help a soldier develop aggressiveness, but it won't help him or her to place the bayonet in-line, and on-target.

As for Krav Maga, I completely agree with you that it has no place in the MMA ring, but I also question its efficacy on the street. MMA--with its component arts of Western boxing, muay Thai, Western wrestling, Brazilian jiu-jitsu, judo, sambo, et al--has genuine self-defense application on the streets, at least in the unarmed context. With regards to weapons, if someone wants to learn a practical method for dealing with knives, sticks, clubs, etc., I submit that Filipino eskrima is far more effective than any modern military combatives. Eskrima was developed over several hundred years specifically for using such weapons, and it has stood the test of time.

Peace,

Dave/G69

Girevik 69
06-15-10, 10:01 am
Regarding bayonet fencing, here's some interesting pics:

20th century bayonet fencing: Royal Marines bouting on board the H.M.S. Repulse, in 1938. The middle pair of fencers in particularly interesting, in that the one of the right is executing a technique known as the "long throw point", which is derived from earlier polearm and two-handed sword use.

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/3436661.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=45B0EB3381F7834DBAFE174C6280C3E72D9752B32E5A6F73 87347052288BB462

19th century bayonet fencing: A contest of cavalry saber vs. bayonet, from the mid-1800s. The swordsman is stopping a bayonet thrust with a Number 2 parry (seconde):

http://faculty.fmcc.suny.edu/mcdarby/images/Fencing%20002.jpg

BryanSmash!
06-18-10, 9:23 pm
I will certainly not dispute that Army manuals tend to give out tactically inferior guidelines, having gone through many in my career, we have saying for this, "Theres two ways to do this, the right way, and the Army way," lol. However, in every manual there is a way to communicate with thee people who wrote it. The 3-25.150 can be found here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-25-150/pref.htm
You may be able to suggest or at least find out why the Army teaches things the way they do by using that info. I'm no expert at edged weapons, but as for bayonet training I can tell you that the Army is phasing it out completely, as it is no longer relevant on todays battlefield, something I totally agree with.
For Krav Maga, I still maintain my stance, as I've found it very well thought out with regards to fighting with a basic combat load including body armor, and its focus on recovering to a fighting stance when you have been taken down something I find extremely vital for current operations. Although all styles and disciplines will be effective to some extent, I feel there is too much emphasis on the ground game which puts troops at a vulnerable position. It's all well and good if a soldier can put Achmed the Terrorist in a rear naked choke, but when Achmed's buddy comes up behind them and smashes said soldier in the face with a rock, its all for nothing.
This though, is just my opinion based on my experience. I'm not saying that this particular style is better than any other, just that it's my preference.

Girevik 69
06-21-10, 12:44 pm
I will certainly not dispute that Army manuals tend to give out tactically inferior guidelines, having gone through many in my career, we have saying for this, "Theres two ways to do this, the right way, and the Army way," lol. However, in every manual there is a way to communicate with thee people who wrote it. The 3-25.150 can be found here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-25-150/pref.htm

I own a hard copy of FM 3-25.150, and it's interesting to compare various things--like the knife work--with earlier military HTH manuals, like that of USMC Lt Col. A.J. Drexel Biddle (Do Or Die, from 1937), or Cold Steel from 1952, by Biddle's student, John Styers.



You may be able to suggest or at least find out why the Army teaches things the way they do by using that info. I'm no expert at edged weapons, but as for bayonet training I can tell you that the Army is phasing it out completely, as it is no longer relevant on todays battlefield, something I totally agree with.

Interesting. Will American soldiers even be issued a bayonet or combat/utility knife, then?

I agree that the bayonet is no longer relevant on the modern battlefield--indeed, that's tied in with my argument against the supposed effectiveness of modern military combatives, for this thread. That being said, it's still interesting to note that the bayonet has still, on occasion, been used effectively in modern times. Famous bayonet charge incidents include:

Captain Lewis Millet's Easy Company (part of the 27th Infantry "Wolfhounds"), which took Hill 180 from Chinese soldiers, during the Korean War in 1951 (Millet won the Congressional Medal of Honor for that one).

Major John Kiszely's Scots Guards, who took the high ground at bayonet point at Mount Tumbledown in 1982, during the Falkland Islands War.

20 troops from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, who were ambushed by 100 Shiite militia in Basra in 2004--the Highlanders charged with bayonets when ammo ran low, and they swept the field.


Sure, they're excpetions to the rule, but it's still fascinating to see the rifle-mounted bayonet--essentially the last of the polearms--used effectively today.



For Krav Maga, I still maintain my stance, as I've found it very well thought out with regards to fighting with a basic combat load including body armor, and its focus on recovering to a fighting stance when you have been taken down something I find extremely vital for current operations.


That certainly sounds practical, and I can see why a soldier would find that downright important. However, I still find nothing amazing about Krav Maga, as it is taught in the civilian street self-defense context. There are far better options out there, IMO.



Although all styles and disciplines will be effective to some extent, I feel there is too much emphasis on the ground game which puts troops at a vulnerable position. It's all well and good if a soldier can put Achmed the Terrorist in a rear naked choke, but when Achmed's buddy comes up behind them and smashes said soldier in the face with a rock, its all for nothing.
This though, is just my opinion based on my experience. I'm not saying that this particular style is better than any other, just that it's my preference.


Understood, bro. For what it's worth, there's always been a great deal of debate over the utility of groundwork, in battlefield situations. Pankration was considered by many Ancient Greek and Macedonian military experts to be useless for the battlefield, because of the focus on groundwork. This sentiment has been shared by modern HTH trainers, like William Fairbairn (the co-designer of the famous Sykes-Fairbairn commando dagger, who taught British Commandos and U.S. Army Rangers in WWII). A different school of thought, however, was shown by the Ancient Romans, the Feudal Japanese samurai, and the Medieval/Renaissance Germans, who all at least made provision for some ground grappling, in their battlefield repertoire--and there was, in fact, one battle that the Romans had with Sarmatian tribesmen on the frozen Danube river, where ground grappling actually played a decisive role in the Roman victory.


Peace,

Dave/G69

BryanSmash!
06-21-10, 2:43 pm
Interesting. Will American soldiers even be issued a bayonet or combat/utility knife, then?



For issuing bayonets, that's generally the company commanders call, but I can tell you that I've never been issued one on either of my tours. I'd imagine the reluctance stems from the possible public relations nightmare of soldiers patrolling through towns with bayonets fixed as well as the overall relevance of the weapon itself, but I've never been in the position to make that call, that's just my opinion.
Combat knives are bought at the soldiers expense if they want one, however the Army does now issue a Gerber multitool, a real lifesaver in the field.