© COPYRIGHT 2011 BY BRADLEY J. STEINER - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Sword and Pen – January 2011 Issue
[Reprinted With Permission]
www.americancombato.com
www.seattlecombatives.com
GENUINE martial (i.e. combat) arts have always been “mixed”. That is, if an art can be said to be a “combat art”, or an art that is “of or pertaining to war” then it literally must possess a mixture of techniques THAT WORK, and not be limited or restricted to only one, specific type of skill (i.e. say, throwing).
Fairbairn’s System is “mixed”.
Applegate’s System is “mixed”.
O’Neill’s System is “mixed”.
American Combato (i.e. our System) is “mixed”, etc.
But long before the above listed systems ever came to be, there was ancient Greek
pankration. There was Chinese/Mongolian wrestling, there were variants of the Hindu or Indian form of hand-to-hand fighting called varmannie, and of course there were the many Chinese “boxing” or ch’uan fa forms — today popularly but erroneously referred to as “kung fu”. Several of these forms — notably the ones being promulgated today under the heading of Chin-Na — were the arts that formed the basis of that which the Japanese “borrowed” and renamed ju-jutsu.
And, if you look at the real ju-jutsu that was taught for combat, rather than the esthetic or the so-called “sport” ju-jutsu (this last being really a contradiction in terms; but that doesn’t seem to bother anybody) Chin-Na was once referred to in China as CHI-CHI SU. It was this that became, upon their acquisition of some of its doctrine, the “Japanese’ art of ju-jutsu”. None of these fighting systems were in the least restricted in what they taught. Their emphasis in different arts was on different specific skills, but their curriculums were — as they needed to be for combat — all-inclusive. For the most part, out of practical necessity, arts remaining “pure combat” forms, placed a major emphasis upon blows.
No restrictions or limitations were, however, a part of these arts in their original
(i.e. their combat) forms.
There are five major schools of karate in Japan: the Shotokan, the Shudokan, the Shito-ryu, the Goju-ryu, and the Wado-ryu. Every one of them includes techniques not normally considered “karate” techniques . . . i.e. throwing, holding, and strangling, at the upper black belt levels. The Wado-ryu, which frankly blends ju-jutsu with karate is evidently well “mixed” as a system, even for complete beginners. (Note: Oyama’s extremely hard karate style, the Kyokushinkai, is world renown, is headquartered in Japan — is probably not regarded as a “Japanese” karate system because its Shinan [Founder] was Korean, and the Japanese are, regrettably, inclined to ethnic bias of a rather strong kind — but is absolutely a “mixed” martial art, nevertheless).
What’s more, the Korean arts (most notably Kuk Sool Won, Hauk Sool Won, Hapkido, and the Tang soo do systems) all teach throws, strangulations, holds, locks — in short, a “mixed” curriculum of skills. When we ourself were a student of ChungDo Kwan TaeKwonDo (1960’s), this Korean karate style (rooted in the same original foundation as Japanese Shotokan) included some throwing, as well as a hold or two every now and again. But Young K. Lee who taught taekwondo at the time never advocated the System as a “sport”, or as a form of recreational competition, or “match fighting”, etc. It was a military combat art. And as such, it contained mixed elements of hand-to-hand technique.
So what’s our point?
The sport that goes by the designation “mixed martial arts” (or MMA) today is based upon an idea that is not at all unique, or new. However, in an effort to be “all inclusive” in a sporting form of so-called “martial art”, the MMAers have produced and participate in what some might observe appears to be mere “brawling with sport-oriented techniques”. The techniques are not sharp, powerful, crisp karate blows; nor are they well-executed, bone-jarring ju-jutsu throws. The “holds” are of a submission (rather than a “control him and kill him”) variety, and the chokes are straight from sport judo. There’s a bit of Western wrestling in there here and there; but never done in a manner that a Master Wrestler like, for example, Gene Le Bell would render it. And several of our acquaintances who are real boxers have noted that the smattering of that which is passed off as “boxing” in MMA is, to be kind, somewhat underwhelming. It isn’t good, solid boxing, they assure us.
Okay, so are we criticizing MMA? Only insofar as some might be misled into believing that MMA prepares one for hand-to-hand combat or actual self-defense.
The same mistake that is sometimes made regarding the UFC, cage fighting, etc.
We have no quarrel with anyone who enjoys any of these sports, and we have
not the slightest desire to persuade anyone inclined to be a “champion”
competitor in any of them to abandon his goals. If you enjoy these types of
sporting/competitive venues then go for it! Good luck to you, and we hope that
you achieve the satisfaction and the success as a competitor that you are
seeking.
There is not, however, any correlation between sporting competition and serious individual combat. The danger in attempting to utilize any sport as preparation for hand-to-hand and close combat is that, necessarily, the techniques that you employ to win your matches are and must be “safe” — diluted, watered down, and nonmaiming or killing actions. While this is as it should and must be, it also defines one of the major differences between sport and combat.
MENTAL ATTITUDE/MINDSET , is also (and, to combat veterans, obviously) an enormous difference. The mindset of the sports competitor who is determined to win is not related to the mindset of either the violent felon or enemy soldier determined to kill his adversary however he can do so; nor is it related to that adversary’s mindset, which is equally determined to stop his enemy by any means conceivable — in order to prevail and survive.
The absence of weapons, the nature of the terrain, the absence of multiple
attacking enemies, etc. etc. go further to prove the huge difference between
competition and combat; but sensible individuals will have gotten the message by
now.
To make it even clearer by example:
A “mixed martial sport” might see the champion soften his opponent up with a few punches, use a throw to get him down, and then go for a submission hold.
A combatant would smash into his adversary with chops to the carotid artery, finger thrusts to the eyes, or/and potentially neck-breaking chinjabs. He might then bring his enemy to the deck by breaking his knee with a side kick (or perhaps by applying a cross-buttock — combat-effective — “hip throw”), Then he would conclude the encounter by kicking his downed enemy’s head in or crushing his sternum with a heel stomp. He might even jump on his with both heels.
All hand-to-hand fighters use “mixed” martial skills. Nothing new about this. It is the way it has always been. But the sporting form of unarmed contest that is known as MMA today is NOT hand-to-hand combat.
