Who else trains in Martial Arts and do you feel there's crossover?

45 years of martial arts. Taekwondo, boxing, Krav Maga, and JKD with some Wing Chun thrown in. Had my own school for years (got married and that put the kibosh on that in a year or so as I worked 40 hr weeks programming and taught 4 nights a week.)

The methods of learning martial arts, breaking things down into stages to learn (like forms) defiantly helped in IPSC/IDPA.

And the dirty low down methods I picked up over the years, especially at defensive technique (not just shooting) schools, helped in making dirty low down defensive shooting techniques (let's just say the things John Wick does is nothing new.)

Deaf

Hokie_PhD said:

I ask as awhile ago, made a reference to martial arts in a thread on training techniques and someone said they were different. I argued that the motor skill control we learn in martial arts is directly related to shooting.

So I'm curious who else has trained in martial arts for any real length of time (I don't mean a little while when you were a kid) and feels that the skills you gained via your martial arts training apply to your shooting?

Click to expand...

Tae-kwon-do for bout 20 years before my feet wore out......
I would say the martial arts mindset and situational awareness carryover for me more than any hand/eye/breathing techniques. Strangely, I picked up a couple mantras from books for when I'm on the gun- I like "Fear is the mind killer..." from Dune for long rifle and "" I do not aim with my hand..." from The Dark Tower for handgun. Works fer me.

Hokie_PhD wrote:
So I'm curious who else has trained in martial arts for any real length of time (I don't mean a little while when you were a kid) and feels that the skills you gained via your martial arts training apply to your shooting?

Click to expand...

How about a long time while I was a kid (i.e. ages 9 to 17)?

I took Judo, which is more a competitive sport than true martial art, so while the physical conditioning and emphasis on balance and fluid movement helped me to be physically ready when I learned to shoot, I didn't find any of the physical aspects directly applicable.

What has stood me in good stead from my Judo training has been:

• The philosophical aspect that avoiding a conflict or settling it without violence is to be preferred,
• The conceptual aspect that deflecting an attack is preferable to meeting it with equal force,
  
• The psychological aspect of emotional control and balance, and
  
• The confidence in my physical abilities instilled by the training gives me more time to think of alternatives to a violent confrontation.

In a physiological sense, I'd say a resounding "yes". Body control and body awareness being key to efficient and effective movements.

I've pursued the practice and development of various martial arts for over 45 years. I've been shooting longer, but have only been seriously training to use firearms (as a LE firearms instructor) for 26 years.

Yes, there's a crossover possible. How could there not be, when you consider the integration of movement, coordination, postural balance and strength development involved in the martial arts, as well as in the practice of incorporating the use of other martial weapons?

One side benefit, for better or (sometimes) worse, to martial arts is an increased awareness.
For self defense, it's never worse.

Hokie_PhD said:

I ask as awhile ago, made a reference to martial arts in a thread on training techniques and someone said they were different. I argued that the motor skill control we learn in martial arts is directly related to shooting.

So I'm curious who else has trained in martial arts for any real length of time (I don't mean a little while when you were a kid) and feels that the skills you gained via your martial arts training apply to your shooting?

Click to expand...

I've got 32 years training in martial arts and 20 years behind guns, yes there is crossover. Core strength and focus, attention to fine muscle and stance details, understanding of tensing and relaxing and what it means to connect different parts of your body together, and many other things cross over very, very well.

I used to run a monthly rifle competition for a few years, and half of the people that attended with me were also involved in martial arts. Some very fine shooting happened on positional shooting.

I also teach marksmanship, both rifle (practical and competition), and handgun for concealed carry licensing. My experience is non MA have a harder time understanding that the entire body is connected. You explain a shooting stance to a laymen sometimes the light bulb don't go off. Meanwhile martial arts folks understand that it is all connected, that tension in your toes (for example) or having your center of gravity unsettled can affect your aim while standing. They understand implicitly that tightening your core muscles can give you added stability, etc.

Meanwhile Joe off the street with the six pack gut doesn't get it at all. "What the hell does tightening my belly have to do with putting lead on target?" (if you read between the lines you hear "I got a gun because I'm horribly out of shape and can't run or fight without a weapon to aid me.")

I think defensive shooting could be considered a martial art of sorts.

I think many in the gun community vastly underestimate the importance of hand to hand skills. Criminals like to use surprise which means you may not have a chance to get your gun in action. Furthermore, not all encounters warrant the use of deadly force. It would be useful to have some skills to use when avoidance and descalation fail. Just because things go hands on doesn't mean you get to use your gun. Keeping oneself safe should be a well rounded endeavor.

I got into the martial arts back in 1961 and still train and teach. I've was a LEO for 9 years and taught firearms at the police academy. I trained in several arts and have to say that the fitness and coordination that is gained can only benefit one's shooting skills. It's difficult to believe there is no crossover; I certainly believe there is.

I think yes and no. The fitness and coordination are definitely good, but I don't think martial arts helps you with guns anymore than dance or something like that. I have a bone to pick with martial arts in general, at least how they're taught in the US. I believe they're virtually useless for self defense.

I did Tae Kwon Do for about six years. I started with Karate, and while I wasn't in it for very long, I have enough experience with it to know it's essentially the same genre. So they're both for all intents and purposes the same thing. The school I was in taught Jiu Jitsu as well, so I'm familiar with what it's all about. Of the three, I think it was by far the most practical. At the time though, I was more interested in the exercise and competition than any practical application. I never saw it as something practical, besides keeping me in shape and being a pastime.

To be blunt, it's 90% BS, and in my opinion it's a scam. The schools lead you to believe that the higher belts are taught practical self defense techniques, and that's just not the case. The forms get fancier, and you can start learning weapons (totally impractical ones) at black belt, but it's just more of the same. It's all about the belt system because that's where the money comes from, and that's what I mean about it being a scam. There's nothing that I know now that I didn't know as a white belt, besides forms that are about as useful as interpretive dance.

With time and practice comes ability, but it has nothing to do with belt testing or those useless forms. I've also seen plenty of black belts get their clocks cleaned by white belts in the ring. And by the time I was a green belt I could do everything. Everything from there was gained by time on the bag and in the ring, and learning forms for belt tests just slowed down my actual advancement. However, even bag work and sparring are pretty impractical. Am I saying I want to take a 360 back kick to the face? No, of course not, but I also don't want to get kicked in the knee, or lots of other things you're not allowed to do in the ring that will happen in a real street fight. And don't require you to be an athlete to accomplish...

Martial arts is also inherently a cult. You practically have to worship the master, despite the fact you're paying him, and there are dozens of pointless rules to follow and a bunch of Eastern mystical mumbo jumbo. Most schools even require the students to clean the Dojo after class. And here's another part where the scam comes in; you can't ask the master to teach you something specific. You have to wait for him to say you're ready, and most things are restricted to belt levels, which translates into paying for testing just to learn something new. Which would be fine if I worked for him, but if I want to learn something specific it's my time and my dime. What it boils down to is they don't want you to know what you don't know. They string you along as long as they can to keep you thinking there's something cool and practical you're going to learn when you're a higher belt. The lower belts are actually not even allowed to see black belts training; they have their own classes, and if they practice their forms during an open class they have to do it in another room. Most schools will even divide lower ranking belts, so you have classes for white to green, green to red, etc. The whole point is to keep the illusion going that the higher belts know cool useful stuff that you will learn once you do enough forms and pay enough money for testing. It's just more of the same.

Then there's the breaking of boards and bricks. I'm here to tell you that anyone can do it. Your 80 year old grandma can do it. It's just a show to make you think you're getting your money's worth during testing. The boards are very dry pine, and the bricks are baked in the sun beforehand. Believe me, if they offered any real resistance their insurance would never let them do it, as people would be leaving with broken hands and feet. I once saw a ten year old child break a brick with his fist, and he was on the scrawny side for a 10 year old. I've also seen five year old girls break boards like they were nothing, because they are nothing.

You are not allowed to touch a weapon until you're a black belt. You can't even touch rubber training knives or guns, so no learning to defend yourself against those for at least five years or so, depending on how often your master deems he needs to let you test to keep you on the hook.

I'm sure there are lots of people who will get their feelings hurt over this, but it's a scam, a cult at best. I would suggest finding someone who teaches Krav Maga with no BS. Even those guys have adopted the standard formula though, with belts and the whole nine yards. Like I said, that's where the money is. People just want that belt to wear around the dojo.

You might have some success with private lessons. Most instructors are masters in multiple disciplines, and they do know a thing or two. They're capable of teaching practical self defense when they want to. I would just tell them up front you're not paying them to join a cult or get belts or adopt their religious beliefs. Tell them you want to learn down and dirty self defense, no funny costumes, no BS. If they have a problem with that, then they're not your guy. And tell them you'll do the pushups and jumping jacks on your own time. Make it clear you'll be warmed up by the time the lesson starts and you want a full hour of real instruction, not general fitness training. And don't let them put you in front of a bag for an hour practicing the same thing over and over. Practice can happen on your time. They'll come up with every excuse in the book to slow you down, so don't stand for that. If you feel like you're spinning your wheels at any point it's time to find a new teacher. They will try to dominate you and get you into a subservient role (it's what they were trained to do), so don't let them forget who their employer is. They don't have any knowledge that dozens of other people in a hundred mile radius don't have, so don't be afraid to take your business elsewhere. And again, if there are belts, tests, or a hierarchy of rules then run and run far.

I'm not trying to pick on anyone. If you enjoy it then all the more power to you. And if it keeps you in shape then that can't hurt your self defense skills. But if you're specifically wanting to enhance your self defense skills you might as well do something more practical. If coordination for firearms training is what you're looking for, I think you would be better served by something more fluid, like gymnastics or dance. Or perhaps kickboxing or taebo. Traditional martial arts are so static and blocky that they might be counterproductive. The sparring would help, though, so I would focus on that if you're already in a regimented martial art like Karate et al.

Just my opinion, and maybe some advice for anyone thinking about going down this road. I don't know where the OP is in all this, if he's just starting out or has been in it for a while.

ETA: In all those years, I must have taken dozens of tests, between stripes and belts. Oh good grief, I forgot all about the stripes! That is the scam of all scams. Some schools even have different levels of stripes, where narrow ones turn into wide ones, so you're looking at five tests in total to advance to the next belt. Anyways, what I wanted to say is never, not once, did anyone ever fail a test. I've had four schools and dabbled with a fifth, so you would think out of all those tests, people, and schools someone would fail. And I have seen people fail parts of the test that were supposed to be all sacred, must do tasks to pass; but the "board" (the senior black belts) always passed them. It's an interesting racket. You can't test until the master says you can, and when you do you just cough up your 70 bucks and you're guaranteed advancement. It's not about gauging your actual abilities, it's about stringing you along. They know most people quit at black belt, so they want to keep you paying the monthly dojo fees for as long as possible, but then again they can't let you get bored. It's all about juicing each and every student for as much as they're worth. They see some students obviously won't stick with it for long, so they test them rapidly to get as much out of them as possible before they get bored and stop coming. The true believers on the other hand, who will make it to black, they want to slow down so they get those dojo fees. The bottom line, if you were learning anything useful then people would be failing the tests left and right. It's like being in a math class where everyone gets an A. You know good and well no one can be learning anything.

P.P.S. Oh no, I forgot about the student teaching! It's all coming back to me now lol. When you get into the higher belts you're always required to start teaching, so half the time you spend teaching forms to lower belts instead of learning new stuff yourself. And no, you do not get paid, or even get a discount on dojo fees or testing or pro shop or anything. It's a "tradition," so you have to do it. Funny how all of these "traditions" are 100% financially motivated eh?

But yea, your typical class as a higher belt is you show up and first you run the warmup. Then the master comes in and assigns tasks to everyone. You spend the first half hour teaching forms to the lower belts. Then after that the master takes you into another room to teach you something new while the lower belts practice what you have taught them. So you're paying full price and getting half the instruction time. I had totally forgotten about that.

Holy cow, I totally agree with grampajack (above post). Why Krav Maga is about the only discipline I subscribe to now.

Notice a distinct difference in answers between those who started in martial arts first vs. those who started with firearms first.

And yeah -- in answer to the OP, yes, and no.

JShirley said:

Using your terminology, to be blunt, 90% of your post is BS, but good job on taking a bastardized martial art cobbled together less than 100 years ago, and known for disreputable practices, and generalizing that and a few conceptions/misconceptions about Asian instructors, for everyone's training experience, Jack.

To the OP, yes. If nothing else, a high degree of MA training- or rather, what most people think of as martial arts training*- develops propiokinesthetic sense. In layman's terms, martial artists have more control over what their body is doing. Additionally, things like balanced stance, strong core, and situational awareness are all developed by MA.

*Martial mean warlike. By definition, martial arts are combat arts. True focused shooting is a martial art, though even disciplined shooting can range from the formalized and clinical target shooting to the extremely combat focused training. In a similar way, there are martial arts that are highly structured, and even if they are developing skills that could be used for defense or offense, are mentally detached and clinical, like kyodo archery.
In general, BJJ is not a great defensive martial art, since deliberately going to the ground in real life is usually a bad thing. I have seen numerous combatants stomped when they hit the ground IRL.

Click to expand...

Uh, not sure why you would think I was talking about Asian instructors... All of mine were white. We had one black belt who was kind of Asian, but he left to be in kung fu movies while I was still a white belt. He had a hispanic name, though, so I'm not really sure exactly how Asian he was, half at most I guess.

I really don't feel like I've generalized anything either. Like I said, I was involved in four different schools, and have varying degrees of experience with Karate, Tae Kwon Do, and Jui Jitsu. I started out in Karate, then moved to Tae Kwon Do because it was pretty much the same and the dojo fees were cheaper. There was one night a week at my original school where they ran a joint TKD/JJ class so the students could get a taste of what both were about.

Granted this was all in one state, but I would be surprised if it were any different anywhere else. Everything I said is pretty much standard practice, and a lot of it is regulated by the various industry groups who control each discipline. In practice, it's almost like a franchise system.

I'm not sure what TKD being less than 100 years old has to do with anything, especially since it's just rebranded Karate. By attacking the one you're attacking the other, too. And those two probably represent the vast majority of martial arts schools out there. Shoot, look at Krav Maga. It's no older, and it's cobbled together from a little bit of everything.

Just out of curiosity, what are you in? There obviously lots of less common ones I have no knowledge of, but I thought I made it pretty clear where my experience was.

JShirley said:

The experiences you relate are common to the bastardized karate known as TKD, which, being as common as it was for years in the US, has unfortunately spread some of those practices to some US karate schools. I have NEVER heard of any automatic advancement in any BJJ school just for paying a belt fee. Understand that I'm not suggesting that BJJ is an ideal fighting art- it's not, it's a spectator fighting sport- but considering that it's an actual judged sport, demonstrating ability to beat lower belts is usually required to advance.

Years ago, I took some Shotokan, but most of my experience has been in kobudo...8 different dojos in 5 states, spanning 23 years.

For the reality check, I work in a correctional facility, and average at least one real fight a work day. (I'm not including situations where I'm able to physically intervene before blows are landed.)

Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with either one of those, but more power to you if they work. I don't think anyone denies martial arts can be effective once you cut through all the BS.

I think anything that involves watching someone do something and following it exactly helps you shoot if you have a good instructor. Martial Art's do this. Also most Martial Art's classes require physical exertion.

JShirley said:

In general, BJJ is not a great defensive martial art, since deliberately going to the ground in real life is usually a bad thing. I have seen numerous combatants stomped when they hit the ground IRL.

Click to expand...

BJJ is evidently one of the best defensive arts around, take a look through YouTube or any of the other streaming sites and you'll see BJJ practitioners of all levels taking people apart in all sorts of situations. It's competitive focus on beating fully resisting opponents maintains it as one of the most effective forms of grappling there is.

Whilst BJJ guys like the ground it also means they tend to choose to take it to the floor and when and who gets back up.

Personally I don't see a correlation between martial arts and shooting, not physically anyway. Good fighters can make for poor shots and vice versa.

Balance could be a bonus but that could be brought about by yoga or climbing or a similar core focused sport.

I believe there could be an argument for a particular mindset brought about through full contact martial arts with fully resisting opponents. They're used to doing something kinetic with violent results which could perhaps help them with reactive, SD styles of shooting.

Golf-21-Bravo said:

BJJ is evidently one of the best defensive arts around, take a look through YouTube or any of the other streaming sites and you'll see BJJ practitioners of all levels taking people apart in all sorts of situations. It's competitive focus on beating fully resisting opponents maintains it as one of the most effective forms of grappling there is.

Whilst BJJ guys like the ground it also means they tend to choose to take it to the floor and when and who gets back up.

Click to expand...

Most of the fights I've seen, and the few I've been in, eventually go to ground. I think any martial art that doesn't include grappling is deficient. What I've never seen is a street fight where someone got kicked in the head, or where any elaborate kicking of any kind went on. I saw one video where a kid heel kicked a bully Walker Texas Ranger style, knocked him out actually, but the bully wasn't paying any attention and just walked right into it. And from years of sparring even, there wasn't much in the way of elaborate footwork. I could do all the fancy stuff, from the cliche flying side kick to the 360 back kick, and not once did I ever successfully land one of those in competition. They're just to easy to block and counter. And that's in the vacuum of competition, so you know they wouldn't work in a no rules situation.

Hokie_PhD said:

I ask as awhile ago, made a reference to martial arts in a thread on training techniques and someone said they were different. I argued that the motor skill control we learn in martial arts is directly related to shooting.

So I'm curious who else has trained in martial arts for any real length of time (I don't mean a little while when you were a kid) and feels that the skills you gained via your martial arts training apply to your shooting?

Click to expand...

Almost 54 years in martial arts training [ and some teaching ] and I totally agree.

ANY martial art can,and should improve your shooting skills and the skills to keep your gun in YOUR hands.

Best takeaway from my martial arts training is situational awareness, conflict de escalation, and avoiding a confrontation.

Believe it or not, regular yoga practice has had a positive effect on my shooting.

Black belt in TKD and studied BJJ. The best aspect I learned from BJJ is that there are a lot of talented grapplers out there...aka humility. You think you are pretty good and if it gets bad, then Ill just do "x." It doesn't work like that. I went in the first day, and was completely out of my element and submitted under 10 seconds. I learned that hands on and carrying a gun in a non retention holster is a no-no.

Most people have no idea how vulnerable they really are when they are up against someone who really knows what they are doing. Here's a good video on martial arts with a focus on BJJ and how vulnerable one really is.

Regarding some of the guys about talking about BJJ, Ryan Hall, a competitive BJJ fighter, made some statements that make sense on street vs mat. The full article is here: https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/3/...-in-on-sport-vs-street-debate-in-martial-arts

To quote:

The angle that makes sense to me is that combative martial arts which creates excellent combative athletes and fighters, like jiu jitsu, wrestling and boxing, while they don't train you for is self-defense, they train you for single combat. I don't care if this person tried to eye gouge me or if they bite me, it is irrelevant. If I want to hurt this person, they don't have a prayer in the world.

I'd say most of the people that say that practice for self-defense and don't train with tough athletes are really doing themselves a disservice. If I can wrestle with, say, Division I collegiate All-Americans and do fine. If I can wrestle with Marcelo Garcia and do ok, what the hell is some regular guy going to do? The only chance they have is to sucker punch me because anything that engages in an actual engagement of physical combat, I would absolutely hammer this person.

That is like saying "Oh yeah, I'm going to go strike out some guys in the Major Leagues because I'm gonna spit on the ball" Get out of here, it is ridiculous! If you take that thought process and apply to any other area of life people would laugh at you.

But when you take someone out of an elite level situation, and have them go against some regular guy... the idea that there is some super sweet awesome dude walking around, everyone knows how easy it is to beat up all the white belts when they come in on the first day of jiu jitsu or how easy it to just beast a guy up who just comes into a boxing gym the first day. Those are the guys walking around in real life.

Because you compete and because you train athletically against resisting opponents, who are not only strong and fast, but they know exactly what you're going to do and they know how to stop you and how to get you themselves, it prepares you to deal with something like this very easily. So basically I feel the whole sport vs street argument is retarded unless you want to start talking about awareness and avoidance and things like that.

Bringing it back to firearms, if I can compete with Miculek and remain competitive (I cant), or hold GM rankings (I dont), then what is the regular guy going to do? We've all been to the range and seen the newer shooters who can't hit the target 7 yards from them. The difference is that they may get lucky, and only need to get lucky once. We must remain humble because we don't know who the guy around the corner is, and how much he's practiced.