can you appreciate diff approaches/styles/strategies

[devante]

question do any of you feel you have a bias against a certain style-approach-strategy; to the point where you can't be fair in regards to the pluses/minuses when discussing certain styles.

obviously we have a way we think is the truth and maximizes abilities/advantages and minimizes weaknesses and disadvantages; but the truth is there are a variety of ways to solve most problems, all dependent on your phys skillset-frame-body type-mindset-temperament-etc etc.

so can you appreciate what others do, or the results they get; i understand being objective and commenting on what you see, but if all you see is bad or good in anyones approach you probably have a bias one way or another. An that limits you ability to appreciate or assess another fighters/opponent/sparring partner/instructor.

 

[KounterPunch]

More clearly pls

 

[Devonmac95]

As a pretty unorthodox style myself, being 5 foot 5, 170 pounds, so pretty much the Tyson of middleweight, while my style is even more unorthodox as an outside-counter fighter, I can appreciate any other approach to fighting, because I usually incorporate many things from different approaches. The only style I dont understad is brawlers, they just dont make sense to me, but i can still respect the style, brawling you gotta be tough as nails. I wolud never want to brawl, but it is nice to see someone else do it effectively.

 

[Strykerx]

As a pretty unorthodox style myself, being 5 foot 5, 170 pounds, so pretty much the Tyson of middleweight, while my style is even more unorthodox as an outside-counter fighter, I can appreciate any other approach to fighting, because I usually incorporate many things from different approaches. The only style I dont understad is brawlers, they just dont make sense to me, but i can still respect the style, brawling you gotta be tough as nails. I wolud never want to brawl, but it is nice to see someone else do it effectively.

How is that working for you?

 

[KarateStylist]

question do any of you feel you have a bias against a certain style-approach-strategy; to the point where you can't be fair in regards to the pluses/minuses when discussing certain styles.

obviously we have a way we think is the truth and maximizes abilities/advantages and minimizes weaknesses and disadvantages; but the truth is there are a variety of ways to solve most problems, all dependent on your phys skillset-frame-body type-mindset-temperament-etc etc.

so can you appreciate what others do, or the results they get; i understand being objective and commenting on what you see, but if all you see is bad or good in anyones approach you probably have a bias one way or another. An that limits you ability to appreciate or assess another fighters/opponent/sparring partner/instructor.

^^^ emmpty T tell you anything.... ???

KarateStylist

 

[devante]

I bring this up because so many people are quick to question a persons skillset or the quality of their training because what that person does is different than what they do or they are taught. Maybe not taking the extra step of trying to understand what the trainer is trying to accomplish or maybe the person being trained...physical advantages or deficits that may impact what and how they teach them.

There are a variety of diff ways to accomplish the goal of striking effrctively and there are a number of factors that impact how a person strikes or executes strikes; so its not as simple as saying this guy cant strike, just because he goes about it diff than you.

In boxing mma etc....you hear trainers saying this guy wasnt taught anything or wasnt being used correctly or was getting by on natural talent; when maybe that isnt the case, maybe that guy has a style bias that prevents them from recognizing the value of another approach.

Its the same in the forum, peoplw are quick to say someone knows nothing because they have a different philosophy approach or modification of tech....themt

 

[FierceRedBelt]

I certainly understand your point and I found myself in much the same situation during an early period of my training. During a fairly light training session at a club that I attend a rather large man came and scolded me and some of my sparring partners. He went on to say that we had no idea how the box and what we were doing was not technical or even boxing. This bothered me, I was not angry, but I was confused.

In retrospect, it was undoubtedly correct, we were not boxing or doing something that really resembled it. Our instruction was of a very different method and was not oriented toward sport or sport ring, even in that. I have no aim to be a professional wrestler and no reason for approaching the fight as one.

Through my practice of martial arts I've found many different approaches to combat sports. Very early in my experience I found martial pure approach to MMA grappling where my partner had no other purpose than to take my back or put me on it. That was eye opening. Later I learned the differences in approach between an American, Dutch, Thai Kickboxers. They all have very different faces on to learn a lot to win. With each of these styles has sub-styles that transition differently.

I go into sparring with different objectives with hitting without being beaten is important, but being hit in sports is an option in order to hit more effectively. From my own experience I can make a substantial emphasis to flee the situation and never be in a compromised position. I never put on the ropes to defend when covered, I tend to make a lot of space and choose my engagements carefully. I never stay on the back and work from gaurd, I'm always trying to make room for climbing or sweep. Hurting my oppenent is a byproduct of my success, but not my ultimate goal my goal is to make it out with the least amount of injury. The creed of a coward? Maybe.

 

[KarateStylist]

question do any of you feel you have a bias against a certain style-approach-strategy; to the point where you can't be fair in regards to the pluses/minuses when discussing certain styles.

^^^ Another T for me....

I bring this up because so many people are quick to question a persons skillset or the quality of their training because what that person does is different than what they do or they are taught. Maybe not taking the extra step of trying to understand what the trainer is trying to accomplish or maybe the person being trained...physical advantages or deficits that may impact what and how they teach them.

^^^ Sinister's Boxing T's have given me a peek-a-boo @ expert boxing....

^^^ Moving back to your quote, if I babbled like this, all sorts of obnoxious commentary & derogatory comics would appear.... I'm jealous, what's your secret???

*** quotechop ***
I go into sparring with different objectives with hitting without being beaten is important, but being hit in sports is an option in order to hit more effectively. From my own experience I can make a substantial emphasis to flee the situation and never be in a compromised position. I never put on the ropes to defend when covered, I tend to make a lot of space and choose my engagements carefully. I never stay on the back and work from gaurd, I'm always trying to make room for climbing or sweep. Hurting my oppenent is a byproduct of my success, but not my ultimate goal my goal is to make it out with the least amount of injury. The creed of a coward? Maybe.

^^^ SummerStriker applying online to an MMA school pretending to be a Fierce, Tang Soo Do Red=Belt....


KarateStylist

 

[PeterPain]

I don't dig conservatism in fights.
Like Western europe judo Philosophy.
(I put my hand on you but refuse formal contact, in fact don't even toutch me at all)

The counterpart in striking could be just running away and striking your opponent's guard until he made a mistake to capitalise on it.

It's near disrespectfull but SO EFFICIANT.
I just can't like it but know it works.

I also don't Bob'n'Weave much but there is a whole thread about it.

 

[devante]

I don't dig conservatism in fights.
Like Western europe judo Philosophy.
(I put my hand on you but refuse formal contact, in fact don't even toutch me at all)

The counterpart in striking could be just running away and striking your opponent's guard until he made a mistake to capitalise on it.

It's near disrespectfull but SO EFFICIANT.
I just can't like it but know it works.

I also don't Bob'n'Weave much but there is a whole thread about it.

My point exactly you don't like a particular approach to fighting, but you can still appreciate how effective it can be; some people can't do that...if they don't like a style they bash it instead of acknowledging the positive aspects of it.

 

[Devonmac95]

How is that working for you?

I dont know if you are being a smart ass right now, but if you are genuinely curious, it works fantastic. Although my offense isn't absolutely amazing, I almost never get hit cleanly, and im very accurate. Now, i'm not on these guy's level, but think like Floyd Mayweather Jr. or Pernell Whitaker sorta style, but used in kickboxing.

 

[Strykerx]

I dont know if you are being a smart ass right now, but if you are genuinely curious, it works fantastic. Although my offense isn't absolutely amazing, I almost never get hit cleanly, and im very accurate. Now, i'm not on these guy's level, but think like Floyd Mayweather Jr. or Pernell Whitaker sorta style, but used in kickboxing.

Genuinely curious, with all the disadvantages you face I didn't know how it would work for you. I love counter fighting but learn that at the highest level I can't stay on the outside of a fighter with more reach and height. That's why I asked you about your style.

 

[Discipulus]

Genuinely curious, with all the disadvantages you face I didn't know how it would work for you. I love counter fighting but learn that at the highest level I can't stay on the outside of a fighter with more reach and height. That's why I asked you about your style.

I learned that my own preference for countering doesn't suit me well against a rangy outfighter either. Kind of opened my eyes to the fact that, with a reach disadvantage, you really have to get off first and create pressure.

 

[Devonmac95]

Genuinely curious, with all the disadvantages you face I didn't know how it would work for you. I love counter fighting but learn that at the highest level I can't stay on the outside of a fighter with more reach and height. That's why I asked you about your style.

Yeah it is pretty weird being on the outside as a shorter fighter, but i feel very safe on the outside. My style is more defense orientated so i always go for safety first, which is why i stay outside their reach, and when im outside, they usually come to me, so it is even easier to close the distance when i counter, because it is 2 forces coming forward. If i cant get off a good offense, i will sometimes switch it up and come in with the dempsey roll, or move in like frazier, but thats just to land a combo, then i get an angle, and get right back out to safety. I admit, it sounds like a weird style to describe, especially with my small size, but it just makes perfect sense to me, and works very well for me.

 

[thugpoet]

I actually love watching fighters with unique styles. I enjoy trying to figure out why what they do is effective.

 

[devante]

I actually love watching fighters with unique styles. I enjoy trying to figure out why what they do is effective.

I enjoy watching everyone and figuring what makes them effective; in the case of guys who go outside the box...alot of people become dismissive. Which I think is a disservice to themselves as fans...students ...coaches..or fighters, because your letting a bias keep you from taking the step to assess or breakdown a style..the coach and the fighter.