"We are not talking about "TMAs v. MMAs" here. What we are talking about is separating the "Sports" or "Hobbies" from the path of warriorship. A warrior wears no label. He honestly inventories his surroundings and threats and compares them to the tools he already possesses. If his arsenal contains an effective response, great, he works to perfect the employment of that tool. If it does not, he MUST (because he is a warrior, not a student of a specific style) seek out an answer to the problem. If that search crosses the TMA/MMA border in either direction, so be it."
I could not agree more. For all the arguing and discussion out there, it really all just boils down to finding what works, for you.
To whoever Ed is, thanks for the insight.
I recall when living in London and visiting the world-famous Budokwai. They knew who I was due to my association with Jan de Jong and having taught with him throughout Europe. They invited me to attend the classes where a particular Japanese style of jujutsu was taught, but suggested if I wanted to learn self defence I should go to this other 'type' of jujutsu. That really was the first time I'd seen anyone distinguish between the two.
ReplyDeleteYes, that's a very peculiar distinction to be made. And one of concern. There seems to be a need for schools to be one or the other. With fractured thinking comes fractured learning, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteMMA can never replace the traditional martial arts!
ReplyDeleteTal
Martial Art Training
Tal,
ReplyDeleteI agree that MMA can never replace TMA, but then again, TMA were flexible and changed with the times and exposure to different warriors and circumstances, so in a sense, TMA have always been MMA. I think the issue may lie more in a sport vs. combat philosophy. Thanks for commenting.