Simon's Art is crap!

MrE2Me2, What blocks or types of blocks do you consider “practical”? - MrE2Me2 In real fights blocks are rarely used. Are they useful? Of course. But, Moh style wants you to block nearly everything, which is stupid. Greater emphasis should be placed on evasion, slipping, bobbing, ducking and weaving. What types of stances or stepping do you consider “practical”? - MrE2Me2 Fighter must be mobile or they will lose quickly against an experienced fighter. Moh is too static. Very, very poor footwork. Pathetic actually. Bow stances are garbage, so is the horse stance, lol. Must at times (most of the time) be on the balls of the feet for mobility. What do you consider “experienced”? - MrE2Me2 What I consider experienced is anyone who has been in multiple competitions where a KO is encouraged and a real and present danger. Another way to gain real time experience is any competition which allows a person to compete against an unwilling opponent and is allowed to go at it at 100% resistance (MMA, kickboxing, Judo, BJJ, Pankration, submission wrestling). Vortexx comments about one of the instructors being good on the ground is really kind of funny because he states that it is because of all his experience outside of the Moh style. This clearly shows that Moh style in this range SUCKS!

Hello TKF_PHS, You posted, “In real fights blocks are rarely used. Are they useful? Of course. But, Moh style wants you to block nearly everything, which is stupid. Greater emphasis should be placed on evasion, slipping, bobbing, ducking and weaving.” With all due respect Blocking is a primary line of defense for me and mine. It is a way to attack “indirectly”, to steal the initiative and dominate. You talk as though blocking were awkward or slow. A Testimonial Up until I was a brown belt, I tended towards what you have described. But when I was a brown belt I was taught how to block by someone who knew. Wayne could really block and he taught me to, as well. I think the problem here is that we are describing different activities. Blocking, an explanation When I post “blocking”, I mean bringing several principles into play automatically. Defensive Fighting Positions, False Openings, and Maintaining Range are some of these. I naturally hold my hands in a “Defensive Fighting Position”. I actually use broken rhythm, to switch my arms through various D.F.P.’s. I also do this with my torso and my entire body, upon occasion. By moving through various D.F.P.’s, I am able to give my opponent several False Openings. By Maintaining Range when my attacker strikes, I can defend these False Openings. These openings would be taken away by attacks to my opponent’s limbs. These attacks are called blocks. They are quick, hard and effective. A comparison of defenses I have not seen anything like them on the U.F.C... The only defenses I see on the U.F.C. matches are getting hit and avoidance. The only exceptions are position blocks (which I view as getting hit). The rule I would also jam, evade or even take a hit, if that meant achieving victory. I’m sure you would agree that the trick here is to be “The First with The Most”. And in the ring, it is mostly attack which would seem to be first. Unfortunately, defense seems to be a poor cousin. The concept of defense as a solid martial tactic isn’t popular anymore. Yet I believe that blocking is the key towards an effective defense in or out of the ring. And I believe defense and offense must go hand in hand. The blocking that I use is not common and that is too bad. I would never stop blocking and I do teach it as a first line of defense. (Why would I do such a thing? They have worked for me in my past.) You posted, “Fighter must be mobile or they will lose quickly against an experienced fighter. Moh is too static. Very, very poor footwork. Pathetic actually. Bow stances are garbage, so is the horse stance, lol. Must at times (most of the time) be on the balls of the feet for mobility.” A Difference of Opinion It would seem that we do not see eye to eye on this issue, either. Using proper footwork is not limited to the U.F.C. Used in conjunction with other principles, The footwork of Moh can bring victory to its student. Firm but Relaxed I was taught that my stance should be firm enough to withstand my attack. In part, that meant that when I landed a blow, my stance helped add power to it. My stance could do this by giving me the balance I needed to hit hard. Alternately, I move between stances by being relaxed without being slack. I am relaxed enough to move to any advantageous position quickly and easily. Definition of a Stance You posted about being on “the balls of the feet” for mobility. I was taught that, “Stances amount to a fluid movement of withdrawal and attack, And they are not meant to be used as a stationary position.” I teach to move through stances on the balls of ones feet, like my teachers before me. For the sake of clarity, I have broken up your comments about experience. (And as an aside, I must say that I have not had a really good debate like this for awhile.) You posted, “What I consider experienced is anyone who has been in multiple competitions where a KO is encouraged and a real and present danger.” Competition Yes, I would agree that that would definitely be experienced. Although, I would say that there are those who need to train. Yet they lack the “fire in the belly” necessary to compete. Do you see competition as the only way to gain serious and real confidence? I do not but then I was knocked out on my orange belt test. Nor was that the only time danger was present in my teaching and training. You posted, “Another way to gain real time experience is any competition which allows a person to compete against an unwilling opponent and is allowed to go at it at 100% resistance (MMA, kickboxing, Judo, BJJ, Pankration, submission wrestling).” My response It would seem that you are referring to criminal assaults here with “unwilling opponents”. Or did I take that wrong (and no sarcasm intended)? In any case, what I see in your comment is very close to what I used to do. I don’t do it anymore because it cost me too much. However, I did learn from it and I do teach what works. Moh works for me. You posted, “I don't know of any serious, experienced and respected instructor who hasn't been knocked out at least once.” My response As I posted earlier on this thread, I knew men who taught me Moh. They also shed blood and fought with broken bones. Sometimes they did this for weeks on end. Something only a fighter would do. You posted about clinching and groundfighting. My Response I do believe that combat in them should be effectively addressed. And with me and my people, it is. All that being said, These are not my favorite ranges, But then there are many U.F.C. fighters who also prefer not to ground and pound. In Closing I was taught that it was the person that made the difference. Skill can and should be preferred over conditioning. But in the end and if all things are equal, it is the participant that counts. So we really are not so far apart. We just have a stylistic difference of opinion. Regards, MrE2Me2

TKF_PHS How are ya my friend. I have been camping for the last week and see this has been a busy little site. IN REGARDS TO What blocks or types of blocks do you consider “practical”? - MrE2Me2 In real fights blocks are rarely used. Are they useful? Of course. But, Moh style wants you to block nearly everything, which is stupid. Greater emphasis should be placed on evasion, slipping, bobbing, ducking and weaving. i disagree with you in the sense that my arms are always up when I fight, I do train kick boxing and I do bob amd weave and slipp etc. But my arms are up and a lot of blows glance off my arms it is known as a secondary defense. In moo kempo a "short arm block" would be the closest thing to a kick boxing type block. Just because it is not a traditional inside, outside or rising block does not mean it is not called blocking. Arms up and bob and weave looks like a combination of moving and blocking to me. And any time I have been in "real time" situations were it has escalated into a fight my arms come up to cover my head, if that is not blocking I do not know what is. ALSO What types of stances or stepping do you consider “practical”? - MrE2Me2 Fighter must be mobile or they will lose quickly against an experienced fighter. Moh is too static. Very, very poor footwork. Pathetic actually. Bow stances are garbage, so is the horse stance, lol. Must at times (most of the time) be on the balls of the feet for mobility The two stances you mention are the two base stances in just about evry style of kung fu and karate. It is a foundation from which to build upon. It is not just about stances but also about posture and maximizing oxygen intake. It is a place for people to start. Not every one has a natural athletic or fighting ability. they need to be trained in stages. What you are talking about is only and strictly fighting. you are not talking about Martial Arts as a whole. And If you are a teacher and all you teach your students about is fighting then maybe you should re-evaluate . shawn

Sifu Shawn, "i disagree with you in the sense that my arms are always up when I fight, I do train kick boxing and I do bob amd weave and slipp etc. " - Sifu Shawn I agree with you on keeping the arms fully up during a fight. With regards to blocking I was talking about "active" blocking and not a "passive" type of blocking Now, I know that having your arms up can encompass both active (use of elbows for destructions etc) and passive (absorbing/deflection of blows) but I was speaking of blocking in which the arms cover a large amount of space (traditional high rising block). I do see the need for these traditional types of blocks but too much emphasis are placed on these when there is a low percentage of these moves being employed in a fight. "The two stances you mention are the two base stances in just about evry style of kung fu and karate. It is a foundation from which to build upon. It is not just about stances but also about posture and maximizing oxygen intake. It is a place for people to start. Not every one has a natural athletic or fighting ability. they need to be trained in stages. What you are talking about is only and strictly fighting. you are not talking about Martial Arts as a whole. And If you are a teacher and all you teach your students about is fighting then maybe you should re-evaluate ." - Sifu Shawn I do understand your point but I am in the martial arts to strictly learn how to fight. I spent over a decade learning discipline and respect through the martial arts and additional years learning that through the Military and the Police force and throughout my years in University. I am now at the point in my life where I just want to learn the fighting aspect and only the fighting aspect. I live and breathe discipline and respect everyday. I can always use more teachings in those areas but the point is that my time is limited with family and work committments. I now rely on my knowledge of the martial arts to keep me alive in my day to day activities in the police. There are many in the military and law enforcement who are in the same boat. I want to go to a class where I learn real moves and then the application of those moves against resisting opponents. I need to learn how to make these moves happen in class against a skilled and unwilling opponent. I need to make my mistakes and learn from them in class and not out in the street where I may get killed. I am an instructor - trainer in close quarter combat and this is all that I teach to my students, how to fight. There is no time to instill respect and discipline except for the way we treat and speak to each other. The students in my class are grown men and women who are supposed to already have respect and discipline. If that is what they are looking for then they can go somewhere else as I expect that from them when they walk in the door. Of course, when someone strays I address it immediately and swiftly in class. I am just pointing out that people are looking for different things in the martial arts.

TKF_PHS, Since you didn’t respond to my longer post, I’ll keep this one short and only address one point. You posted,”I am now at the point in my life where I just want to learn the fighting aspect and only the fighting aspect.” I practice and teach a version of Moh that is all about just that, It is surviving and remaining healthy when in a hostile confrontation. This is often against larger and more desperate foe(s). Boxing, kick boxing, wrestling and mixed martial arts all use weight classes. And they do so for good reason. Now to be fair, Royce Gracie did put the ground game back on the map, so to speak. Although, I notice that last time out, his ground moves were countered quickly. His tricks are out. Regards, MrE2Me2

TKF_PHS I am just pointing out that people are looking for different things in the martial arts. That is perfect. that is my point as well. I agree with everything you say in that statement. We teach traditional and combative martial arts so people have an opportunity to train what they want. And like you stated If that is what they are looking for then they can go somewhere else That is why some people like tai chi, some cardio kick boxing, some MMA and some people like traditional arts, and yes even Moo kempo(not to incite an argument but you just sent them there if they did not conform). my club teaches adults and we also teach kids. We are also a combative club, every class involves sparring. And sparring in different ranges. I work part time as a concert security supervisor, in charge of crowd control. We also do security for Multi cultural events. (and have competed in different combat sports) I know where you are coming from. There is a big difference between the way reality conflicts are , and the way non- combative traditional arts approach things. There is also a huge difference between combat sport and real combat. Combat sport has rules which can make in diificult for a 160 lb man to fight a 200 lb man. Real conflicts do not have rules ( as you know) thus allowing head butts, hair pulls etc. so that the 160 lb man has more of a chance. I guess I like to try to have a variety of things for our students and let them pick there own direction ,instead of me saying " this is the what you have to learn or go somewhere else". However if you are working with adults and they are all military or law enforcement personel then I totally understand where you are coming from. I teach from a different perspective depending on student base. ( for example. Womens shelters: concepts are generally of a "defense and escape" nature as opposed to offensive to avoid encouraging or planting a seed that would lead to attempted revenge, because of people often returning to abusive relationships. my kickboxers: Taught defense and evasion tactics, mobilty, but also taught when and where to retaliate and to do so with unwavering commitment and aggression. So I guess we are kind of arguing the same point. I need to make my mistakes and learn from them in class and not out in the street where I may get killed. I could not agree with you more shawn

"Now to be fair, Royce Gracie did put the ground game back on the map, so to speak. Although, I notice that last time out, his ground moves were countered quickly. His tricks are out." - MrE2Me2 To be fair to Royce his ground moves were countered with ground moves that put his opponent into a striking advantage. His opponent surely would not have been in a position to strike if he did not know any ground work. Also, like a true sportsman, Royce gave all the credit to his opponent and apologized to his fans for not doing well. No excuses were coming from Royce. Everybody loses. This lost will only make Royce a better martial artist as it will challenge him to perhaps be a better striker. Sifu Shawn - I do see the value in having many different kind of classes. Especially if you are running a business. It would be extremely hard to run a school with just fighters as there is only a small percentage of people who want to compete in full contact. As you said earlier, I am lucky because I do only train with law enforcement or the military. I am surrounded by people who have the same beliefs and are looking for the same type of training.

TKF_PHS, To give you an idea of just how much influence Royce Gracie has had. I went here and found this. Jeff Speakman’s webpage http://www.jeffspeakman.com/ Regards, MrE2Me2

Wow...as far as ground work goes there were quite a few flaws with his guard game. It was quite awful.

L.O.L. Picky, picky. My point was, His Kenpo is known for its strking, not its grappling Yet here we see a stylized version of ground fighting.

I do understand your point but before he makes a video he should try learning some groundwork from a certified Brazilian Jujitsu Black Belt. His ground work was just awful. But, I do appreciate that he is learning ground so that he can put himself into a striking advantage.

TKF_PHS: Sorry these responses come so late, but I was quite busy the last two weeks. "4 reasons “Simon’s art was crap” 1. No competition. 2. No experienced teachers. 3. No practical blocks or stances. 4. Next to nothing in clinching or groundfighting ranges." #1 and #2 really have nothing to do with Simon's art. There are Moh schools which compete, and there are others that don't. There are Moh schools run by teachers with decades of experience and plenty of tournament experience, and there are others run by blue belts. You're confusing the style with the training methods and business practices. #3 and #4 do indeed address the style itself. My views on blocks and stances are very similar to MrE2Me2's, and I'll try not to repeat everything he said, but answer your points in my own way. --- "Seriously, I do find the lack of experience in instructors quite shocking." So did I. Fortunately that's changed. The current studios are taught by instructors with close to 2 decades of experience. "What I consider experienced is anyone who has been in multiple competitions where a KO is encouraged and a real and present danger." The Edmonton chief has competed in such competitions for years, including at the international level. --- "I have never met a single TKF instructor who was proficient on the ground." If you want to meet one who's extremely proficient, come to Edmonton. "Vortexx comments about one of the instructors being good on the ground is really kind of funny because he states that it is because of all his experience outside of the Moh style. This clearly shows that Moh style in this range SUCKS!" Actually I stated the exact opposite. I find it quite frustrating that you repeatedly misinterpret what I (and others) are trying to say. Here are some quotes directly from my previous posts: "...The defences often involved throat strikes, neck breaks, etc., which he showed to be way more effective than the common grappling vs grappling approach which is taught in most other places..." "...the stuff we have been shown is definitely not wrestling or judo. If the Edmonton chief tried any of it in a wrestling tournament, he would be kicked out within a few seconds. Furthermore, the defenses which he shows us are all motions from forms or out of the knowledge sheet..." "...We don't see grappling and striking stuff as two separate approaches or styles. Instead, we see both as part of one integrated system which uses different approaches in different situations and combines them in various degrees when necessary..." "...As I demonstrated at length in an earlier post, Swanstrom is applying the Moh style against grappling attacks. His previous training helps him come up with the grappling-related applications, but the applications themselves are still directly out of forms or other parts of the Moh system..." "...The current Edmonton chief has wrestled in international competitions, and is extremely skilled with everything that has to do with throwing, takedowns, grappling, ground fighting, and submissions. And yet he still prefers to apply the Moh style rather than his wrestling moves to defend himself in such situations..." --- "In real fights blocks are rarely used... Greater emphasis should be placed on evasion, slipping, bobbing, ducking and weaving." Blocks are rarely used because most fighters don't know how to use them properly. When done properly blocks are much faster and require less energy than ducking/weaving/etc. They are done without compromising body structure and therefore stability and power. Moh blocks are designed to demolish the attacker's limbs and position him the best way for the counter. However, blocks have to be done right in order to be effective. Often that could mean a difference of less than an inch in the arm position/angle. If blocks don't work for you, perhaps you haven't learned them correctly. That would not be surprising, as I used to have the same problem (and so did MrE2Me2). Actually, most of the students coming over from the old Edmonton studios where they were taught by inexperienced instructors had problems with their blocks, and had to relearn them. --- "Fighter must be mobile or they will lose quickly against an experienced fighter. Moh is too static. Very, very poor footwork. Pathetic actually. Bow stances are garbage, so is the horse stance, lol." Again, chances are you were taught things incorrectly by inexperienced instructors. I know that in Edmonton even the bow stance was taught wrong for years before the opening of the new studio. When done properly, the stances and footwork are extremely effective. MrE2Me2 explained it quite well with the "Firm but Relaxed" principle. Fluid motions and quick transitions with proper timing and distance combined with solid and stable stances while blocking and striking in order to deliver the greatest power with minimum wasted motion. A good Moh practitioner can certainly move quickly when he wants to. But he also knows how to hold his ground, which I believe is a very necessary skill that is lacking in most other systems. --- "I live and breathe discipline and respect everyday." No offense, but the "respect" part seems to be absent in many of your posts. Either that or you have a very strange sense of humour. --- "I want to go to a class where I learn real moves and then the application of those moves against resisting opponents. I need to learn how to make these moves happen in class against a skilled and unwilling opponent. I need to make my mistakes and learn from them in class and not out in the street where I may get killed." I agree with this completely. This is exactly what we learn at TKF.

View Full Version: Simon's Art is crap!