Here's the thing- I completely agree that he was a notable martial artist, and he's worth mentioning in my book because he basically single-handedly destroyed the myth of "size does not matter, ever, technique and spirit will always win" to those who were there to witness the mass destruction that Slomanski brought upon the unsuspecting japanese karateka, also kind of forcing the introduction of weight classes. Problem is however, in the scale and reputation in which you're comparing to someone like Rickson Gracie.Quote:
Originally Posted by cyril
Don't get me wrong, I make a pretty terrible Gracie nutrider. But, in my view, Slomanski fails to match up in terms of 1. Reach 2. Public Perception.
Rickson, Royce were at the crest of the MMA revolution, brining their family's style of fighting to the public in mass numbers, changing public perception in terms of the usuability of grappling in a full-contact match. Media (thanks to modern times), general success in the public and private forum, never-ending word of mouth... so much reach, so much overall respect from a large number of people.
Hank, on the other hand, was not covered much at all in comparision (once again, times), and is truthfully, an often-missed figure in the world of martial arts, regardless of the fact that he was thought of as the third most feared thing by japanese people, right after 'Fat Man' and 'Little Boy.' Instead, by a large percentage of the small number of people who know of him, he is better known as the guy who taught Elvis karate. Sad, really.
So no, not dissing the guy, but I disagree on the level on which he was influential.