Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ymarsakar" data-source="post: 2588245" data-attributes="member: 825109">But they don&#039;t ever actually have anything to say when I raise questions that deal with different training methodologies?People need to get their prejudices and biases fixed, before accusing other people of spreading misinformation, first. Making such accusations is easy and might make you feel better, but it offers no content, no substance.They get really emotional about what is or isn&#039;t &quot;true&quot; about traditional martial arts, like TMA is their personal pet and beloved member of their family, but they have nothing to say about actual training, good or bad.So why the preference over emotional sensationism vs practical training methods? Why spend so much energy focusing on protecting traditional martial arts turf and far less on thinking about the differences and benefits/detriments of training methodologies?As for who this concerns, there&#039;s nobody in particular. It&#039;s just a statistic. Questions here at YA MA, get a lot of answers, even from the regulars about what a technique is or how good/best it is. But the moment it goes into differences in training methodologies, things flat line out.For example, 10 answers on Reality Based systems and martial arts. 3 answers (only 1.5 serious ones) concerning actual reality based training methodologies that people have done or thought about or analyzed.Difference? Could be. Looks like it. That&#039;s not the only one I have in mind, of course.When the question is generic and about comparisons between TMA and MMA. It&#039;s popular and people like to present their case. When it&#039;s about something more specific, especially about training, suddenly things get quiet.People actually don&#039;t argue about training methodology here. I&#039;ve never seen any martial artist here say &quot;Oh, that adrenaline training system sucks and is wrong, don&#039;t use it&quot;.They don&#039;t say anything about it at all. Nothing. Nadda. Zip. Maru.For example, to move away from the RB vs MA genre, we can talk about TMA vs MMA. Only some people talk about the training differences between TMA and MMA. Otherwise, it&#039;s mostly about how they don&#039;t like MMA attitudes or how they don&#039;t like TMA fakery or something personal like that.Only some people speak about the training differences between a Gojo Ryu kata/bunkai vs the technical proficiency/deficiency of MMA strikes/kicks. But even there, not much is spoken about WHY MMA is deficient.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ymarsakar, post: 2588245, member: 825109"] But they don't ever actually have anything to say when I raise questions that deal with different training methodologies? People need to get their prejudices and biases fixed, before accusing other people of spreading misinformation, first. Making such accusations is easy and might make you feel better, but it offers no content, no substance. They get really emotional about what is or isn't "true" about traditional martial arts, like TMA is their personal pet and beloved member of their family, but they have nothing to say about actual training, good or bad. So why the preference over emotional sensationism vs practical training methods? Why spend so much energy focusing on protecting traditional martial arts turf and far less on thinking about the differences and benefits/detriments of training methodologies? As for who this concerns, there's nobody in particular. It's just a statistic. Questions here at YA MA, get a lot of answers, even from the regulars about what a technique is or how good/best it is. But the moment it goes into differences in training methodologies, things flat line out. For example, 10 answers on Reality Based systems and martial arts. 3 answers (only 1.5 serious ones) concerning actual reality based training methodologies that people have done or thought about or analyzed. Difference? Could be. Looks like it. That's not the only one I have in mind, of course. When the question is generic and about comparisons between TMA and MMA. It's popular and people like to present their case. When it's about something more specific, especially about training, suddenly things get quiet. People actually don't argue about training methodology here. I've never seen any martial artist here say "Oh, that adrenaline training system sucks and is wrong, don't use it". They don't say anything about it at all. Nothing. Nadda. Zip. Maru. For example, to move away from the RB vs MA genre, we can talk about TMA vs MMA. Only some people talk about the training differences between TMA and MMA. Otherwise, it's mostly about how they don't like MMA attitudes or how they don't like TMA fakery or something personal like that. Only some people speak about the training differences between a Gojo Ryu kata/bunkai vs the technical proficiency/deficiency of MMA strikes/kicks. But even there, not much is spoken about WHY MMA is deficient. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Loading…