Since I'm new to Bullshido.net, I thought I would ask the all important question. What criteria does this forum use to judge if a martial art is Bullshido or not?

Effectiveness?
Time Tested?
Battle Tested?
How long to defeat an opponent of comparable skill?

Or is it just kind of based on, "Well, the are a lot of McDojo's teaching martial arts such as Karate and Taekwondo, and they suck. But the guys in the UFC use BJJ, an Muy Thai, and several other arts, so they are not bullshido and kick ass. Everyone else's art sucks and is ineffective."

Now I say that somewhat sarcastically, but the point remains, what qualifies an art as effective, and as bullshido to the people on this forum? I have my own criteria for myself personally but I'm curious for your opinions.

thanks

You've constructed a straw man. Go look around this forum. Most of the investigations are of people who have made claims. The purpose of the investigation is to determine whether said claims are fraudulent. That makes things really, really simple - no need to "judge if a martial art is Bullshido".

Oh, and in before YMAS.

Effectiveness?
Time Tested?
Battle Tested?

All these, as evidenced by competition records and/or video evidence over time, in least-restrictive (mma), or reasonably-restricted (boxing) rulesets. Although it's technically not a prerequisite (more a corollary), training with aliveness is more or less required for an art to be "effective."

Other criteria, such as the amount of time it takes to produce a competent fighter, etc. are flexible.

This thread belongs in newbietown.

Agreed.

It's about not telling lies, it's not nice, and it make baby jesus cry.

Agreed.

It's about not telling lies, it's not nice, and it make baby jesus cry.

If that were true, No woman would be able to sleep at night.

You've constructed a straw man. Go look around this forum. Most of the investigations are of people who have made claims. The purpose of the investigation is to determine whether said claims are fraudulent. That makes things really, really simple - no need to "judge if a martial art is Bullshido".

Oh, and in before YMAS.

BURNING MAN SUCKS!!!!! FUCKING HIPPIES!!!!!!!


SEARCH FUNCTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OP USE IT NNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

PIRATE_JUTSU is an example of non bullshido!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

start by training with aliveness

usually if you train with aliveness against someone trying to resist and beat you then you start to automatically weed out bullshido from your training.

a straight punch stays a straight punch, a roundhouse shin kick to the thigh remains a round house shin kick.

a floppy jumpy judi chop/wing chun foom/TKD masturbating dragon kick will fail and end you on your ass.

you learn not to do that again in fear your ass gets unnecessary pounding (what your uncle does to you at night is a sunk cost, dont count that), bullshido just got cast away.

rinse and repeat with everything and you suddenly learn 2 things for striking:
1) simple is good
2) being good is FUCKING HARD.

Here's my thing folks. I read on another post, some guy was saying how he thought that bjj wasn't as effective as it was in the past. My thing was I never thought it was as effective as everybody said it was. Useful? Absolutely. But I never thought it was the end all be all of martial arts, and still don't. I was 16 or 17 when the first UFC came out, and I was impressed. Royce was really good. Then something happened, I'm not sure which UFC, but it took him 45 minutes to beat the guy. In my mind that isn't effective. So my thing is, is that something that is factored into the bullshido equation. I realize that every fighter has different attributes, and two skilled opponents may take longer, but the bottom line is, do you guys and bullshido as a whole think that a 45 minute bout or fight with someone proves an effective martial art? Especially when it is the poster boy for the system partaking in that 45 minute bout.

And I know I'm gonna catch a lot of flak for the this post, but it's just an example guys. I am really curious what you think defines a bullshit martial art. Cause we all have our own opinions on that subject, and I would like to know yours. I'm not talking about training time in years or months, I'm talking about fight ending time. In my opinion if a fight goes longer than 2 minutes maximum, you did something wrong. A fight starts quick, it should end that way too.

The problem is that you cannot arbitrarily declare that a fight needs to have certain attributes, such as time, type of techniques used, strategy, etc. It is a fucking fight. However it goes, it goes.

Royce did that boring **** because he wanted to win, period. He could have taken more risks to entertain you, but all he cared about was winning or at least not losing. I personally do not agree with his strategy, but you can not say it failed him.

but it took him 45 minutes to beat the guy. In my mind that isn't effective.

Your are absolutely right on this. This is exactly the reason that people think the old bare knuckle boxers who would fight 80 or 90 rounds were a bunch of pansies.



In my opinion if a fight goes longer than 2 minutes maximum, you did something wrong. A fight starts quick, it should end that way too.
And what do you base this opinion on? Wishful thinking maybe? Fights go on as long as they need to for someone to either win, or the fight gets broken up. The closer in skill the 2 participants the longer it will take.

Here's my thing folks. I read on another post, some guy was saying how he thought that bjj wasn't as effective as it was in the past. My thing was I never thought it was as effective as everybody said it was. Useful? Absolutely. But I never thought it was the end all be all of martial arts, and still don't. I was 16 or 17 when the first UFC came out, and I was impressed. Royce was really good. Then something happened, I'm not sure which UFC, but it took him 45 minutes to beat the guy. In my mind that isn't effective. So my thing is, is that something that is factored into the bullshido equation. I realize that every fighter has different attributes, and two skilled opponents may take longer, but the bottom line is, do you guys and bullshido as a whole think that a 45 minute bout or fight with someone proves an effective martial art? Especially when it is the poster boy for the system partaking in that 45 minute bout.

And I know I'm gonna catch a lot of flak for the this post, but it's just an example guys. I am really curious what you think defines a bullshit martial art. Cause we all have our own opinions on that subject, and I would like to know yours. I'm not talking about training time in years or months, I'm talking about fight ending time. In my opinion if a fight goes longer than 2 minutes maximum, you did something wrong. A fight starts quick, it should end that way too.

Helio and kimura fought for 2 hours does that mean that they sucked

cuz zombie helio will emerge from the jungle and kick your ass. (sadly helio did not learn how to fly only Carlson and company knows that secret)

I will explain this for you ONE TIME. ONE.

Royce cleaned house in the first few UFCs because no one knew how to grapple. Once people began training in grappling the skill gap got lower. The lower the skill gap the more athletic you have to be to prevail.
Now everyone has approximately equal skill. The skill difference in the top ranks of MMA is RAZOR THIN. Everyone is a BJJ black belt or a Judo black belt or a Sambo black belt (or whatever the equivelant is there) or a NCAA champion wrestler or whatever. They all have VERY VERY good grappling.

If you want to see how badass BJJ is for self defense then you watch a BJJ purple belt (I pick purple belt because most peopel are capable of obtaining a purple as a hobbiest) vs someone who has no training. It's not even CLOSE to being competitive. It's a massacre. Even a good blue belt can choke you out 5 times in 2 minutes.

Grappling is a necessary component of being a complete fighter. So is striking. At the moment wrestling/judo is becoming more important because if a grappling specialist can't get the fight to the ground then a striking specialist will win. So being able to stay standing or get the takedown becomes the deciding factor in the fight. That's because the sport of MMA is evolving.

Self defense is the same. BJJ vs Random Dude == Choked The **** Out.

In my opinion if a fight goes longer than 2 minutes maximum, you did something wrong. A fight starts quick, it should end that way too.
How old are you? How much actual fight experience do you have?

Regarding your statement about Royce taking 45 minutes to finish a fight. Neither Rickson nor Royce are large men. Part of their strategy against bigger and stronger opponent's was to wear them down until they could take advantage of their opponent's exhaustion. It was a calculated risk that served them well in Vale Tudo and later, the ring. At least until everyone else started training ground fighting ( see Royce versus M. Hughes ).

I say this to explain their methods rather than trying to defend their honor, or any crap like that.

Your are absolutely right on this. This is exactly the reason that people think the old bare knuckle boxers who would fight 80 or 90 rounds were a bunch of pansies.



And what do you base this opinion on? Wishful thinking maybe? Fights go on as long as they need to for someone to either win, or the fight gets broken up. The closer in skill the 2 participants the longer it will take.

Well, that is the way I was taught my whole life. If it goes longer than 2 minutes your gonna start getting tired, and your giving the other guy more opportunity to inflict damage and even perhaps injury on you. I've found it personally to be a good model, or example to try to obtain. It makes sense. 2 minutes in fight for your life conflict is a long time. Two people of equal skill, it shouldn't take longer it should take less time to end it. Because the guy that makes the first mistake loses. Not always, but two guys of equal skill, the guy that can capitalize on that mistake, and continues too, will win. That's my opinion, and I base off of personal experience. Longer than 2 minutes and things start working against you. At least in my experience, they do.

Well, that is the way I was taught my whole life. If it goes longer than 2 minutes your gonna start getting tired, and your giving the other guy more opportunity to inflict damage and even perhaps injury on you. I've found it personally to be a good model, or example to try to obtain. It makes sense. 2 minutes in fight for your life conflict is a long time. Two people of equal skill, it shouldn't take longer it should take less time to end it. Because the guy that makes the first mistake loses. Not always, but two guys of equal skill, the guy that can capitalize on that mistake, and continues too, will win. That's my opinion, and I base off of personal experience. Longer than 2 minutes and things start working against you. At least in my experience, they do.
So your opinion was formed because your cardio sucks? Snort.

If you're unable to last more than two minutes, you need to train harder and more often.

Don't they also start working against the other guy, or does the two minute rule only apply to one of the fighters?