MT and SS

[Scott Sonnon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uolgNhv3ab0&search=san%20shou%20vs%20muay%20thai

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Lj09EUwqVw&search=san%20shou%20vs%20muay%20thai

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99viWY3xyvk&search=san%20shou%20vs%20muay%20thai

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WK1ibxF5V0&search=san%20shou%20vs%20muay%20thai

[Robert V]

Coach, you beat me to it. I was going to post that.

I love throwing :D !

[Robert V]

San Shou vs Draka

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6PM6bS0gYY&search=draka

I just love this stuff!!!!!!!

Sanda world championship 2002:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nzu6R8XEEPQ&search=Sanda

Power of the leg kick: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSJr34zXYBs&search=Sanda

Sanda Instruction: (I have this VCD) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjuY8KqUIBo&search=Sanda

[KD Jones]

I would just love to hear someone smarter than me spew opinions on these...

Now, I knew San Shou had to be meaningful, because Coaches Sonnon and Wilson chose to work with it. But this makes it look like either San Shou is seriously underrated in the pop mind, or Muay Thai is over-hip there...

But are these mismatches? It doesn't look like that's it to me, if only for the fact that in this tiny, non-random sample, there seems to be something consistent going on in the way the styles slam together.

San Shou legwork training must be something as well... I was especially struck by the double kick by way of a ball-of-foot bounce off the floor toward the end of 1st fight, 1st part. (And I'd hate to see what those clinches would have looked like if the San Shou guys hadn't had their fingers incapacitated by those gloves.)

I don't know about anybody else, but I'd love to hear any informed comments on the whiches and wherefores of these clips.

[Scott Sonnon]

KD,

I don't know anything about those fights, but I can say that the outclassing appeared due to individual fighter attributes and not stylistic advantage.

[Robert V]

Coach is right. It's not so much about the "style" but the rules and training method.

Sanda/San Shou vs Muay "under Muay rules" may have a different outcome or may not. It depends on who's fighting.

Having the ability and skills to throw someone is a big advantage.

It's like a BJJ fighter fighting a Sambo fighter under BJJ rules. The outcome may or may not be different under Sambo rules.

the "X"style vs. "X"style is more of a promotional ploy rather than a true martial skill test.


Nontheless, I truly feel Sanda and San Shou are extremely underrated as a sport and self-protection skill base.

[KD Jones]

Thank you, got it. I didn't mean to imply any utility of the "what is the ultimate martial art" nonsenses. It just looked like the San Shou fighters had some very powerful abilities... that may have only looked consistent because of the rule set. I was more looking for potential strong points in the training... things that might have been sources of the way they move. I just don't have the education to name or weed out this sort of stuff when I think I see it.

[Coach Jones]

Nontheless, I truly feel Sanda and San Shou are extremely underrated as a sport and self-protection skill base.

Well, I think that's really because thier more sport than system. For the most part the athletes who compete in San Shou or Kuoshu, etc. are from various specific styles. It's kind of like saying that MMA is a style.

I agree it is underrated as a sport, though.

[Robert V]

True, Coach. Most are martial artist who come from a system and then venture into the "Sport" of Sanda/San Shou.

I'm working to put the Sanda sport into more of a system to teach.

[Scott Sonnon]

My perspective is this: any sport which is open to athletes outside of the sponsoring organization is a "Mixed Martial Art." In this case, both MT and SS are MMAs, as is Sambo.

Sport is always inextricably intertwined with politics (which is why I resigned from Sambo, Sombo and ROSS.) For instance, the story goes that the Chinese wanted to level the playing field from the Thai who were destroying their Chinese counterparts. San Shou rules cater to the strengths of Chinese "styles" and remove the 'strengths' of Thai "styles." So the story goes. But as someone who has been involved, unfortunately intimately, with the politics of Sport Sambo, it could a part of the truth, a distortion of the truth, or a complete fabrication. Regardless, it's an example of the Sport - Politics connection.

This is more kindling for the fire to create an RMAX sport.

[peterng25]

I am a Tae Kwon Do practitioner myself, from way back. I have the greatest respect for this art, and am still very enthusiastic whenever I see someone successful using its skills (example: David Loiseau spinning kick, which he proudly asserts comes from his TKD practice).
This said, I feel one must be cautious because of just what coach said: "politics".
In some countries, exhibition matches between TKD and another style will be put on, and all one can see is the advantage of one style over the other: they seem to be ridiculously overmatched. Of course, the crowd feels obligated to applaud and seem carried away in a fervor of chauvinism (whether they really are or not is another question, they might just feel they have to go along, out of politeness and good manners).
If you go to video.google and search for TKD, you can see this clip, which seems much more balanced:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5493534041886130229&q=tae+kwon+do
In short, if it seems necessary to put on a show to demonstrate the superiority of one style or another, OK, but the truth will come out: if the guy doesn't have the flow, but is stuttering and wondering what is going on and what 'technique' to apply one microsecond after the action, then it comes down to natural abilities, not any particular style.
Just my opinion

[Scott Sonnon]

I couldn't agree more, Peter.

Also, I appreciate the recent belief that high kicks aren't possible. It makes my TKD background so much more effective. :twisted:

I only wish that people still believed that a grappler couldn't get in close enough to use his skills. *sigh* :P Blasted Gracies. :lol:

Whatever people belief, the opposite will happen, in direct proportion to their conviction to those beliefs. Of course, just like the platypus (a mammal which lays eggs), they are branded as 'flukes'.

[Robert V]

I agree. Again, it's the individual's personal ability that means most.

Yet, "training method" is just as important.

I think "training method" gets lost in the "styles" debate.

Many times "training method"="style"

Within a style, usually comes a particular training method the "style" has adopted.

My TKD experience began in Korea in 1984. It's not the same TKD that I studied when I return stateside. The training method was different. The classes were taught by ROK soldiers. They had "combat" in their sights, not TKD trophies. At the time, their was a lot of heat between north and soulth korea. People often got killed on the DMZ there, but you wouldn't know it by the little press and military cover up. So, they had to think more combatively.

Bill Wallace aka "Superfoot" did a great interview recently. He is old, crazy and outspoken now, discussed his pleasure in seeing a lot of the big name tournament guys get beat in Chuck Norris' new full-contact event. He said he has nothing against them, but he wanted people to see that in tournament style Karate or TKD, you don't develop(as Mr. Sonnon would say) "toughess". Flashy offense, but no one is really getting hit well. He talked about how in boxing the first thing that happens when you start to train is that they put you in the ring and you get your brains beat in. If you still come back after that, then they'll train you. But if you can't take a punch or not willing to take a punch, then all the flashy offense is ....


Everyone has a plan until they get hit!

It's the boxing training method that stands out. It's the Gracie training method that stands out, in which every day you are applying your offense against a "resisting" opponent. It's the Muay thai training method that stands out.

Condition+skill+"toughness (Where and how do you get your toughness? often through training method)

Who are you as a fighter once you've been hit? That's an important question and there is only one way to find out.

[Chuck Kechter]

...it's the individual's personal ability that means most.

Yet, "training method" is just as important.

I think "training method" gets lost in the "styles" debate.


It's the boxing training method that stands out. It's the Gracie training method that stands out, in which every day you are applying your offense against a "resisting" opponent. It's the Muay thai training method that stands out.

Condition+skill+"toughness (Where and how do you get your toughness? often through training method)

Right on Robert!


...like saying that MMA is a style.

You're right in saying it isn't a "style" it is however a cogent integrated (or should be :wink:) training method!

Good stuff!

[Coach Jones]

You're right in saying it isn't a "style" it is however a cogent integrated (or should be ) training method!

I agree on the "or should be part". A big problem now is everybody wanting to jump on the MMA bandwagon.

Just because a person is a good striker doesn't make them an equally good grappler nor vice versa. In the martial arts world this confusion is perpetuated by folks that philosophise and theorize when they should be experiencing and learning, practicing and refining.

As Coach Sonnon has said a billion times before, "You can't take someone where you haven't been and you can't give someone something you don't have."

This idea is often abused when people magically decide one day that they can teach a thing without ever doing a thing.

Gotta walk the walk before you can talk the talk. :wink:

[Scott Sonnon]

Brandon,

And that argument is the EXACT reason for building a team of athletes with diverse backgrounds. Too often organizations are built around some iconic figurehead who is unquestioned and unevolving. His "development" is seen as the penultimate goal, rather than merely being seen as just another man's process; hence, the 'guru syndrome' of martial arts.

[Coach Jones]

Amen, brother!

[Robert V]

You gentleman are amazing.


His "development" is seen as the penultimate goal, rather than merely being seen as just another man's process.[/quote]

[Doc]

What strikes me (no pun intended) is that there really are no styles here, just rules systems. The rule system itself creates a "style" to a certain extent. I've seen a lot of Chinese Martial Arts, and the Sanda/San Shou looks nothing like them!!! Coach Sonnon has talked about how the various combat sports emphasize different transitions.....San Shou the striking to throwing transition....Sambo/Judo the throwing to submission transition....BJJ the transitions on the ground.....MMA seems to be an attempt to combine them all, though some more effectively than others. Put a Thai Boxer into bouts with San Shou rules long enough and I'll bet he starts looking more and more like a San Shou fighter! Put a BJJ practitioner in Sambo bouts long enough and I'll bet he starts looking like a Sambo fighter! I think its not so much a matter of "style" or "system" in these cases, but rather a matter of what you can get away with and what works given the rules imposed. Just my 2 cents. :D

[Scott Sonnon]

Keith,

Exactly. This for m of Specific Adaptation to an Imposed Demand is no different than any other. This is where the Performance Diagnostic Trinity becomes so valuable. Each facet engages the SAID principle:
http://www.circularstrengthmag.com/images/pdt.gif