Could someone please explain?

That one tends to make me laugh. Many people that preach that as the only way don't seem to realize that no matter how hard you fight or how rough the training, it is still only training. Unless two people fight with the intention that one will live and the other die, then it is not realistic. Common sense tells me that such training if it were to be available would not be very popular. At least not for long.

Today the young guys act as if we old timers don't know what hard contact fighting is, or what training with a resisting opponent is. Heck I like most old time martial artists have spent many classes fighting on the floor, against the wall, ...etc. That is nothing new or revolutionary. It has bee done by all traditional martial arts in times past as well as today. We just did not call it reality, ground game, stand up game, striking arts, grappling arts,....etc. We did not see the need to since it was all part of just learning to fight off an attacker.

...

RBSD systems are what I call STQFS (Short Term Quick Fix Solutions) they are systems where people are taught a few simple methods of self defence that they can learn quickly based on what the founder of the system considers what actually goes on in a street altercation which could be based on personal experience, common sense and studying violent crimes - the good ones at least. They are only really good for self defence courses and police training, their basic philosophy is 'what can I learn that I could use now?' The bad ones, and there are many, preach the above as an alternative to a real martial art system and criticize traditional martial arts by saying that they do not work and are a waste of time and too fancy because they relate real martial art schools with McDojos/McDojangs/McKwoons and think they know better. Traditional martial arts think longer term our philosophy is not just 'what can I learn that I can do now?' but 'what can I learn to do and perfect that I can use years from now?'

I guess I find myself standing in the minority opinion here.

I never thought of it as a (misleading) marketing gimmick, or having anything to do with money. Although, I do see it as a gimmick.

I do see the term used based on a misconception of classical styles, or based on observations of McDojos - ironically, the ones with the gimmicks and those more concerned about money.

And that is this: they see things like someone (a black belt) punching in a forward stance, and otherwise standing stationary; while the defender carefully negotiates the punch, steps around, and does some abracadabra and the person who threw the unrealistic strike goes flat on the ground with a splat.

The "reality-based" person sees this as "unrealistic" (which is true, but doesn't bother to look further) and decides to implement his/her own "more realistic" self-defense criteria. If the person had chosen not to get a point of view from a McDojo, then they would not have seen the unlikely scenario and perhaps not bothered to invent something "new". Or if they had instead invested more time into the quality school and realized that such a scenario - while unrealistic - is a training aid; that is, something taught to beginners, and more advanced students slowly add dynamic movements to the scenario. As if that weren't enough, the "reality-based" system inventor perhaps sees the dynamic movements from the quality school, but doesn't stick around long enough to see the scenario played out, where the defender might make mistakes, the attacker makes mistakes, the attacker makes non-pre-determined movements... and so the inventor thinks all he's seen was non-realistic fighting.

It is convenient that "reality-based" is a fancy catch-word based on some notion that TMA isn't realistic. And if you only factor in the McDojos... that would be a fair assessment.

It IS a marketing gimmick. When you advertise and describe what you sell, you make the implication that everything else out there doesn't have what you have. That is the gimmick. This is a standard chapter out of the political elections books. Nothing new. Sheeple will always follow strong marketing - positive or negative.

Man of faith nailed it. Couldn't agree more. There is no such thing as a more 'reality based system'. Either it works or it doesn't and if it worked back then it still works now. Why wouldn't it? Everything on your body still breaks the same. What can be more realistic than a battlefield where a lot of these martial arts were developed?

However, I think as a society our mindset has changed. The need for real self defense (not school yard brawls or sports fighting) is just not as necessary, so that motivator is gone. Martial arts is for entertainment with rules and motivated by lots of money rather than a means to stay alive. We are also raised to be much more compliant and trusting, not wanting to hurt anybody in any way (feelings as well as physically) which I think carries over to everything we do including our martial art. Violence is just not acceptable and we are doing everything to disarm people so often when we do our techniques the intend just is not there but there is nothing wrong with the techniques themselves.

I relate it like this

I built a model a car with my father a few years back. That car gets 30 mpg and can go up to at least 70 ( I think faster but the police got me before I could find out)

My nissan rouge gets 28mpg. The model a does better. And there is less chance of it being stolen so I don't need an alarm. The engine is much simpler and has far less that can go wrong.

It still works great

Most people won't drive it because they don't understand how it works.

Just because something is old doesn't mean its not as good or efficient. I laugh at some of these kids, they think just because the use new terms its modern, they think there training method isn't the same as ours, or that new is better.

Its all the same techniques, same tactics, same foot work. Same principals. The only thing different is the terminology. Or the fact we use kata as a manual where they use books and videos

Fortunately Kajukenbo never marketed itself as a "Reality based system". We're just the "Hawaiian street fighting art from the low income neighborhoods of Honolulu."

I honestly don't think any slogan will convince beginners to continue training in a traditional school. Even when Kajukenbo Black Belt Chuck Lidell became UFC champion, it did not make Kajukenbo schools any more popular. And the Fight Quest episode on Kajukenbo did generate some interest. In my original instructors school, we had a few people joining up after watching the Fight Quest episode. Unfortunately, they only lasted a week or two before quitting.

Because Krav Maga actively markets itself as a "Reality based system", the whole world knows about Krav Maga and the majority of people believe it is the world's most deadly and brutal street fighting art. But whatever, people are entitled to their beliefs.

Hi there

And God said thou shall sell your art for money! And man gladly did so adding some more bollocks to it in order to give it the hard sell!

Thats about the crux of it!

Reality based systems are based on the fact that the system and the instructor has actually had some experience in the field. Therefore if someone is selling this as such then for me they better be an ex serviceman or police officer or someone that has used their skills on a daily basis. Otherwise their reality based system suddenly becomes a fantasy based one! These guys and their statements are laughable

Theres so much sh!t out there its time to get the shovel!! lol

Best wishes

idai

That has to be one of the most effective marketing gimmicks I have ever seen. Its effective because people believe it. I have spoken to many people, who try to have me believe, that the classical systems no longer "work" because they were,

1) Created in a time when "no one knew how to fight."

2) Outdated, As though we now have different bodies and unheard of methods of attack.

Schools and systems use that crap to make people think they are getting something so much different. I was at a similar school once, they actually for a fleeting month, made me believe some arts were created for personal growth and not as my school put it "street defense."

Hand to hand combat was far more common in the past than it is today. Hence the reason these new systems are as you put it once, pale reflections of the great arts. Its sad really.

Anything for money. I asked a similar question once. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsczK...

=======================================================================

Advanced....everything you named that should be included in a "practical" system, is in traditional arts and Kata/forms.

When people of your outlook don't understand this, they go on to devise these "reality based systems." Little do they realize, they are borrowing from Kata!

Pretty much martial arts for the 21st century. Too short attention spanned to train years for the more hidden gems in the traditional martial arts.

Good answers already.

I'd just simplify it to say that a "reality-based system" (beyond being a marketing tool) is attempting to describe a system that is practical and effective.

Hope that helps.