The levels of reality in fights: exhibition, training, fight

There’s a difference, that, when watching martial artists, is of extreme importance to be aware. As martial arts are a science, evaluating the styles, masters and methods is of great importance to choose the adequate martial art for you. As Sun Tzu’s Art of war 孙子宾法 stated “the different tactics should be employed” there’s no better martial art, there is an art more adequate for you, but, although some beliefs, there is good and bad martial arts, otherwise you could just create a ridiculous martial art and follow it.

The first of the levels is an exhibition. You can notice this stage by the lack of variety of the attack “the indirect methods of attack are immensurable’ is said in the Art of War by Sun Tzu孙子兵法; the attacker will attack when and how the opponent chooses, something that obvious would not happens in a real fight and have a great impact on the strategies used, saying that a move will work because it worked on a demonstration like this is dangerous. Even if it is more used for didactic and purposes only, a better demonstration should be employed, like fake attempts and resistance to grappling moves “boards don’t hit back, make boards hit back”.

Then comes the training. Here rules are imposed, but inside these rules are giving a liberty of strategies, what in martial arts we call “resisting opponent”; different from demonstration they are generally here to not collaborate with the attack, exactly the contrary, which comes near of what happens in a fight. The sports-based and some shows fall in that category.

And finally comes the real fight, the war with no rules (in reality that is not a good description as some “no rules” competitions have rules (no more than two participants, the fight just start after a referee allow, no weapons, etc.)). But what is a real fight? Two soldiers fighting a war, two gang members brawling, two black belts fighting; I don’t dare to say what a real fight is. Real fight is like the supreme truth or the dao 道, “If you grasp you lose it”; if you define it you will be wrong, because fight is made to break paradigms. Forget the Geneva Convention, the UN; have you watched the last conflicts? These are just instruments for one or some nations dominate another by other means but war. Forget the honor, the friendship, the respect, nothing of this will be useful in a fight (Sun Tzu said…faults of a general:.. a delicacy of honor which is sensitive to shame). It is incredible that some martial arts, arts of war, generally do not show more than demonstrations (Taijiquan (Tai Chi Chuan), aikido, self-defense” methods) and almost all don’t go further than training (MMA(mixed martial arts), Muay Thai, Brazilian jiujitsu (BJJ), Judo, Taekwondo, etc.).

Boards don’t hit back, make the boards hit back

Bruce lee said a famous statement “boards don’t hit back”. Demonstration of breaking boards don’t impressed him, they show good demonstration of generation of power but fights are much more complex, involve moving targets, targets that will strike first, attacks blocked, attacks dodged, etc. I see video of masters doing forms and demonstrations against non-resistant students, how their breath are perfect, their stances solid, and they either do not impress me; a perfect respiration after 12 rounds of boxe against a heavy weight champion, this would impress me; a solid stance against a heavy weight judoka doing kuzushi (disequilibrium) after a throw attempt would impress me.

Just because you cannot train properly don’t mean you can’t train well. If you have a board, ask for the person holding it to move the board in a non predictable pattern and not hold it statically, ask for him to take the board out of the way in the moment you strike the board, tian, ask your partner to throw the board on your face, but this is not an excuse for poor demonstration of abilities. If you are doing forms, you have all the time of the world to throw an attack, but act as if you are fighting the fastest dodger in the word; you can do it in the order you want, in a order you are used to it, but act like the opponent would not make the moves in the order you want, or while doing a move you have to stop and do another move; you don’t need power in doing forms, but block as if you are receiving the strongest attack of all; attack as if the wind that you hit was made of iron; no one will throw you off balance in forms, you can have the most perfect instance in the world, but will be this true against a grappler? While you are doing forms, if needed, throw yourself out off balance and try to recover from it; punch yourself if needed, but that is not excuse.

Now, I’m talking about bad methods of training that are not excuse for bad demonstrations of abilities. If you have an human, a partner, the most important machine of war of the universe(yes, you heard well), capable of incredible problem solving, breaking paradigms, creating where there is nothing, and you impose limitations as a judge to start the fight, or in a demonstration, make him attack only when you tell him, when he could fake an attack, attack with a left punch instead of a right, if the demonstration is to show a move to counter a punch, if you are expecting a certain kind of attack and your partner attack in this fashion this will be not useful, Sun Tzu said “attack where you are not expected”, impose rules limiting and modifying the rules of war, don’t attack here, don’t push there, don’t go somewhere, don’t flank me, don’t ambush me… I can only say: what a waste of potential.

martial arts versus guns

There’s an old discussion about guns and martial arts, which would be the better, and of course the gun is the obvious answer that comes to mind. Imagine two people discussing about it and the a person with gun says “I would kill you in a blink with my weapon” and the martial artist punch him in the face, take out two teeth of the opponent, punch him in the stomach and while he is curved kick his face; now the person with gun would be on the floor subdued. And now the person with gun says its not fair (fights seldom are fair) and demands that both after a count down attack it other, so he can be prepared. Then, after the countdown, the martial artist punch in the face with one hand and simply blocks with the other hand the arm holding the gun, and continue with a flurry of moves winning again. And then again the person with gun wants a rematch but get the gun ready first and take some distance, maybe taking a few seconds, and now maybe the winner is the person with gun; but give me a few seconds and I disable someone with equally effectiveness. Of course there’s that exact same history told by the other side: the strong and quick martial artist shows a series of fantastic moves, jumps, sequence of incredible kicks (you would see in my book about the martial arts and the art of war that this is simply not a good way to start a fight) and the other guy get his gun and simply shoots him; this sequence appears in one of the Indiana Jones moves if I remember.

Martial arts or guns, which is the better? They’re different, one are better than the other in different contexts; one is better in close range, other in long, you can’t bring the weapon everywhere and it will possibly not bring always it with you. A weapon is intimidating and will give you advantage if you are not taken by surprise. The gun have severe disadvantages, like accident with kids and youngsters, you maybe lack the control and in a sudden attack of anger or after drinking alcoholic beverage and may do something you will regret.

Martial arts or guns, which is better? None is the best, they are part of the same art, the art of war: martial arts: martial comes from to Mars, the Roman name of the Greek god of war Aries, literary the art of war. Martial arts have a long tradition of weaponry, in Chinese styles, various use some kind of weapon in its training, and long range weapons were also used, for example the Japanese Kyujutsu, and bows were mentioned in the art of war text. We probably not see so many styles and arts developed by ranged weapons because they’re more simple to use and don’t arise the complexity of close combat that, because of that, have so many styles. But should; managing a weapon should involve different point of views and different techniques, and in the diversity the best style should arise.The most adapted and modern martial arts include training against guns, an example that all martial arts should follow. I have a lot of Ideas about fighting against guns and with guns that maybe I will show in my next videos. Don’t forget that the most perfect martial weapon are the humans; without them we would not have anyone to operate guns or any weapons. A subdued person can’t launch a nuclear nuke against his opponent.

The diferences of the three main internal martial arts 内家拳nèi jiā quán

Xíngyìquán形意拳 is more vertical, it is said to serve better to the young, it is the more explosive and attack oriented, more yang of the internal martial arts. Being based on the fight with spears, it is especially useful in long range fighting.

Bāguàzhǎng八卦掌 is more horizontal, with it spins, is said to serve better the man or woman of middle age. It main characteristic is its circular footwork and movements, and is associated in war with the cavalry, it speed, very used to flank the adversaries, and is a technique very known in Baguazhang: walk in circles around the adversary and attack their flanks.

Tàijíquán太极拳(太極拳)(Taichichuan) uses all directions, is three-dimensional, is said to be of more use in the old age. Is associate in war with the walls, because its solid stance and equilibrium and use in defense. Is the more Yin oriented and mother of the internal martial arts.

 

A new fundamental question of martial arts

In one of his books “brazilian jiujitsu theory and techinique”, Renzo and Royler Gracie family members proposed a fundamental question to martial arts: how defeat a stronger, bigger, more agressive opponent. In fact the internal martial arts offer a answer to this question: not opposing force against force, yielding and using sensibility to overcome the opponent: imagine you exchanging punches with Mike Tyson, you give him one punch, he gives you one punch, and so on, or you pushing an sumo fighter and the sumo fighter push you back; not a good idea. Every martial art has its way of compensate the lack of strength with speed, footwork, dodges, etc. I propose a new fundamental problem to martial arts: How defeat more then one opponent; having to fight more than one opponent, and this is common; when fighting alone is one of the most difficult problems you could face. And, in this aspect, brazilian jiujitsu offers a poor solution: if you try to take one of the opponents to the ground, the other(or others) will kick your head and other vital points to the death, while you are in a disadvantageous position on the ground and the opponent standing up. Baguazhang is the perfect solution; with it circular movements is possible to attack multiple opponents at the same time and with it circular footsteps and spins, have just a small momentary exposition of flanks(sides) and the rear, that is the most vulnerable points when fighting more than one opponent, and if you know about war, you know how important is to control the flanks and the rear.

Do not learn moves, Learn with moves

A weiqi (go) saying, referring to the studies of joseki(patterns that are common in the game) that is indeed very useful in go, but should be applied to war too. In martial arts, don’t learn moves or forms and simply repeat them, learn WITH then; Sun Tzu said “do not repeat tactics that give you victory”. And this all should be applied to all Chinese philosophies. Do not learn the forms of太极拳太極拳Taijiquan(taichichuan) as if the fight would require them in the exact order you train, or they would exhaust all the possibilities of the art, Sun Tzu said that the tactics would be never exhausted; don’t simply know a judgment or line reading of the 易经(經)Yi jing (I ching) if when they say good fortune or misfortune is all you need to know; don’t learn by heart the 八卦bagua water in times of drought could mean a good thing not danger; don’t learn the text of the art of war and think it will make you a master of war, Sun Tzu said that the plans should be modified according to the circumstances; in feng shui don’t put an object in a direction that should give you luck in front of the door.