You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Philosophical DiscussionDo you have a philosophical view to martial arts styles, training, etc. ?
I can't remember which thread it was on, but there was a discussion in which the martial arts were classified into types.
So I was wondering;
How would you categorise the martial arts (a martial arts typology)?
__________________ "Tradition comes from when a master realises a truth, then teaches it to others; his source was the world around him. The tradition begins when students follow the doctrine but fail to see the truth it teaches. Martial Arts, like religion, are now the gospel.
So I assert; Seek not to follow in the footsteps of great men, but seek that which they themselves had sought." Magister, on the Eskirmological Law of Institutionalisation
I think it was probably the "How do you define a TMA thread" that you're thinking of. Anyway, I stick with my choices on that thread:
SMA - Sport Martial Arts - styles that train primarily for competition in an arena that has prohibitive rules.
RMA - Reality Martial Arts - styles that train primarily for real world self defense or combat applications.
XMA - Extreme Martial Arts - styles that mix traditional martial arts techniques with acrobatics, gymnastics, or even dance.
While I think these classifications are better than just TMA or MMA, I think many styles fit under two or all of the above descriptions.
__________________ "An eye for an eye only blinds the world." - Ghandi
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." - Albert Einstein
"Without deviation from the norm progress is not possible." - Frank Zappa
I think it was probably the "How do you define a TMA thread" that you're thinking of. Anyway, I stick with my choices on that thread:
SMA - Sport Martial Arts - styles that train primarily for competition in an arena that has prohibitive rules.
RMA - Reality Martial Arts - styles that train primarily for real world self defense or combat applications.
XMA - Extreme Martial Arts - styles that mix traditional martial arts techniques with acrobatics, gymnastics, or even dance.
While I think these classifications are better than just TMA or MMA, I think many styles fit under two or all of the above descriptions.
Actually, styles that use weapons are going to fit under one of the classes I mentioned. Some styles teach weapons for forms competition, some teach weapons for practical applications on the street, and some teach weapons for XMA demos.
__________________ "An eye for an eye only blinds the world." - Ghandi
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." - Albert Einstein
"Without deviation from the norm progress is not possible." - Frank Zappa
__________________ "Tradition comes from when a master realises a truth, then teaches it to others; his source was the world around him. The tradition begins when students follow the doctrine but fail to see the truth it teaches. Martial Arts, like religion, are now the gospel.
So I assert; Seek not to follow in the footsteps of great men, but seek that which they themselves had sought." Magister, on the Eskirmological Law of Institutionalisation
Good question.
Iaijutsu could be classified as a RMA because, even though the chances of using a sword for self defense in the modern world are slim, it was developed in ancient Japan for the specific combative purpose of defending oneself, not on the battlefield, but in everyday life. However, I have seen people competing in forms competitions with the katana, and iaijutsu techniques could be incorporated into those forms.
Xingyi quan and Taijiquan would probably best go under SMA's because most of those styles' practitioners train for health or sometimes competition purposes. I've seen Tai Chi forms at open MA tournaments as well. On the other hand, some Xingyi quan schools could fit under RMA if they train from the art's original purpose of using explosive power to overcome an opponent.
As I said before, there are a lot of gray areas in almost all styles, so saying that any one style fits completely into one category is just not realistic. I just think RMA, SMA, and XMA work better than MMA or TMA.
__________________ "An eye for an eye only blinds the world." - Ghandi
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." - Albert Einstein
"Without deviation from the norm progress is not possible." - Frank Zappa
Good question.
Iaijutsu could be classified as a RMA because, even though the chances of using a sword for self defense in the modern world are slim, it was developed in ancient Japan for the specific combative purpose of defending oneself, not on the battlefield, but in everyday life. However, I have seen people competing in forms competitions with the katana, and iaijutsu techniques could be incorporated into those forms.
Xingyi quan and Taijiquan would probably best go under SMA's because most of those styles' practitioners train for health or sometimes competition purposes. I've seen Tai Chi forms at open MA tournaments as well. On the other hand, some Xingyi quan schools could fit under RMA if they train from the art's original purpose of using explosive power to overcome an opponent.
As I said before, there are a lot of gray areas in almost all styles, so saying that any one style fits completely into one category is just not realistic. I just think RMA, SMA, and XMA work better than MMA or TMA.
So you would put them into those categories dependant upon the way the individual chooses to practice it?
If taijiquan could, in some cases, be put into RMA could we also put Krav Maga along side it? What I am getting at is, what is the underlying categorisation which separates those two as RMA?
Furthermore, could you not consider renaming the XMA category to embrace other kinds of martial arts? Afterall, what is the unifying factor beneath your definition?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoddeBPM
I agree since nobody seemed to have a SOLID definition on TMA and MMA, each person's idea were slightly different.
Mixed Martial Arts is not a categorisation, but I'm sure I could come up with an adequate typological definition...
I think 47MartialMan could propose a SOLID definition of Traditional Martial Arts (because I've seen him do it)...?
__________________ "Tradition comes from when a master realises a truth, then teaches it to others; his source was the world around him. The tradition begins when students follow the doctrine but fail to see the truth it teaches. Martial Arts, like religion, are now the gospel.
So I assert; Seek not to follow in the footsteps of great men, but seek that which they themselves had sought." Magister, on the Eskirmological Law of Institutionalisation
So you would put them into those categories dependant upon the way the individual chooses to practice it?
If taijiquan could, in some cases, be put into RMA could we also put Krav Maga along side it? What I am getting at is, what is the underlying categorisation which separates those two as RMA?
Furthermore, could you not consider renaming the XMA category to embrace other kinds of martial arts? Afterall, what is the unifying factor beneath your definition?
Mixed Martial Arts is not a categorisation, but I'm sure I could come up with an adequate typological definition...
I think 47MartialMan could propose a SOLID definition of Traditional Martial Arts (because I've seen him do it)...?
Hmm, you'd be surpised. A lot of members on this board, splits the board into two types, MMA and TMA. So I started a thread to get definitions for the two like Souldrum did, but I found a lot of people had different opinions.
Can you remember the names of the threads? I'll look them up.
__________________ "Tradition comes from when a master realises a truth, then teaches it to others; his source was the world around him. The tradition begins when students follow the doctrine but fail to see the truth it teaches. Martial Arts, like religion, are now the gospel.
So I assert; Seek not to follow in the footsteps of great men, but seek that which they themselves had sought." Magister, on the Eskirmological Law of Institutionalisation
So you would put them into those categories dependant upon the way the individual chooses to practice it?
If taijiquan could, in some cases, be put into RMA could we also put Krav Maga along side it? What I am getting at is, what is the underlying categorisation which separates those two as RMA?
Furthermore, could you not consider renaming the XMA category to embrace other kinds of martial arts? Afterall, what is the unifying factor beneath your definition?
First, let me be clear that the categories of RMA, SMA, and XMA are not my creation. As I stated in the thread where I first brought them up, these distinctions were introduced by Richard Ryan, the creator of Dynamic Combat and co-founder of Integrated Combative Arts Training. I discovered them in an article Ryan wrote for Sept. 2008 edition of Black Belt magazine, and I thought they were better ways to categorize martial arts than just TMA and MMA.
In his words, it is modern martial arts that fall under these three classes. "And although each form may have aspects of the others, they're fundamentally different in practice and application."
So basically, he categorizes modern martial arts under these classes by how they are taught and applied. Which, of course, means that one taekwondo school might be SMA because they do nothing but train for point sparring and forms competition, while another taekwondo school in the same town might be RMA because they stick to traditional applications for combat such as using knees, elbows, and small joint manipulation.
__________________ "An eye for an eye only blinds the world." - Ghandi
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." - Albert Einstein
"Without deviation from the norm progress is not possible." - Frank Zappa
First, let me be clear that the categories of RMA, SMA, and XMA are not my creation...these distinctions were introduced by Richard Ryan, the creator of Dynamic Combat and co-founder of Integrated Combative Arts Training.
His distinctions are pretty flawed. I will explain why when I have more time.
__________________ "Tradition comes from when a master realises a truth, then teaches it to others; his source was the world around him. The tradition begins when students follow the doctrine but fail to see the truth it teaches. Martial Arts, like religion, are now the gospel.
So I assert; Seek not to follow in the footsteps of great men, but seek that which they themselves had sought." Magister, on the Eskirmological Law of Institutionalisation
A General Theory of Martial Arts
Linear Mode
