Page 6 of 6 First ... 23456
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    80
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Kungfoolss
    Hmmm, for someone that discounts my analysis, you sure go out of your away just to denounce it. I'd say it's plenty effective, especially seeing how none of my points have been disputed in your two succeeding postings. That's quite telling.
    No, your analysis isn't effective, because academic analysis of martial technique is inherently ineffective.

    I will not give you a point by point rebuttal of your initial arguement. That would be a waste of time. Martial arts are not meant to be proven with words, but with actions.

    I could provide ten sound verbal arguements why an armbar wouldn't work on the street, and to an uninformed person I bet I would be pretty convincing.

    Likewise I could verbalize ten arguments why a pressure point knockout would work on the street, and the aforementioned ignoramous would probably be convinced of the effectiveness of said technique.

    An armbar, however, does work in real life. We know this because it has been proven effective time and time again in competition against a fully resisting, trained opponent. A pressure point knockout does not work in real life. We know this because time and time again this technique has failed against a resisting opponent, trained or not.

    See? You can use any debate tactic you want. You can employ scientific reasoning and the best logic. But a fight is illogical, and all your waterproof theories will fail, because theories don't win fights -- training and practice do.

    You would prefer to verify the effectiveness of techniques with theory and debate (see your first post criticizing the effectiveness of Krav Maga for evidence of this). But theory and debate only work until you step on the mat.

    So here's my advice: If you want to have a debate to verify the effectiveness of techniques, go pay Ashida Kim's message boards a visit. I'm sure they would be glad to have you. If you want to help expose fraudulent martial arts practices stick around.

  2. #52
    Thaiboxerken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    6,349
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Strat, do you not realize that KungFoolss is a cultist of one of the most fraudulent martial arts systems out there... SCARS?
    "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." – Voltaire.

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    80
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Thaiboxerken
    Strat, do you not realize that KungFoolss is a cultist of one of the most fraudulent martial arts systems out there... SCARS?
    Yeah, I know. I guess I'm just foolishly trying to help him. Maybe I should just give up.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Sunny Hawaii
    Posts
    4,972
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Strat_Tones
    No, your analysis isn't effective, because academic analysis of martial technique is inherently ineffective.
    Sure it is, which is why after 3 posts you still refuse to broach the points that I have discussed.

    I will not give you a point by point rebuttal of your initial arguement. That would be a waste of time.
    Translation: I know you’ll just end up ripping me to shreds so I’d rather avoid the embarrassment.

    Martial arts are not meant to be proven with words, but with actions.
    Here's a quote of wisdom that may help to enlighten you ->

    "I want to clarify something. Science is knowledge gained through a systemized method of learning. Art is the execution of a skill. Without science, you lack a firm educational foundation for execution. That is why the science of war, military science, is different from the art of war, execution of strategy and tactics. With this in mind, you can then appreciate the differences. You see, if you "study" martial arts, you are merely learning the "doing" of something, a technique. You are not learning principles.

    Further, there is a difference between false principles/science and true science. True science utilizes observation, analysis, and experimentation to discern the actual principles behind phenomena. False sciences utilizes traditions, hearsay, opinion, and/or philosophical beliefs to CREATE a 'principle'. This leads to a weak foundation for developing the skill of fighting, because the methods are not reflective of reality."

    Sheol 2003


    I could provide ten sound verbal arguements why an armbar wouldn't work on the street, and to an uninformed person I bet I would be pretty convincing.

    Likewise I could verbalize ten arguments why a pressure point knockout would work on the street, and the aforementioned ignoramous would probably be convinced of the effectiveness of said technique.

    An armbar, however, does work in real life. We know this because it has been proven effective time and time again in competition against a fully resisting, trained opponent. A pressure point knockout does not work in real life. We know this because time and time again this technique has failed against a resisting opponent, trained or not.
    Hmmm, nothing stated here addresses the issues discussed in my analysis. Not surprising.

    See? You can use any debate tactic you want. You can employ scientific reasoning and the best logic. But a fight is illogical, and all your waterproof theories will fail, because theories don't win fights -- training and practice do.

    You would prefer to verify the effectiveness of techniques with theory and debate (see your first post criticizing the effectiveness of Krav Maga for evidence of this). But theory and debate only work until you step on the mat.
    (Laughs) Sorry, obviously you look at all confrontations from a “sports mindset.” Very quaint.

    So here's my advice: If you want to have a debate to verify the effectiveness of techniques, go pay Ashida Kim's message boards a visit. I'm sure they would be glad to have you. If you want to help expose fraudulent martial arts practices stick around.
    Sorry, I’m not in the market for receiving advice from inferiors and the truly brainless. When you’ve gotten some backbone and can find it within yourself to debate the topics discussed, I’ll consider communicating with you once again. Until that time, you’re only boring me with your incessant stupidity.
    Kungfoolss, Scourge of the theory-based stylists, Most Feared man at Bullshido.com, and the Preeminent Force in the martial arts political arena

  5. #55
    Community Corrections Officer supporting member
    Matt W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    3,621
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Spunky, Actually that was not taught as a gun disarm. It came up when discussing range procedure. If the instructor needs to take the gun away from you during a shoot, they will step up behind you, place their hand on your shoulder and then control gun by grabbing it by the slide. Somebody asked if that could injure the hand if the gun fired at that point, and hence... the information I gave you.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    80
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    To Kungfoolss:

    I will admit that I didn't know much about SCARS when I responded to your first post in this thread. I still don't know much. However, after a perusal of your organization's website I feel I know enough to make a comment or two.

    Let's see, how to begin.... Hmmm..... Bwahaaaahaaaahaaa!!!!!!111111 You must realize that you're being conned, right? This is pure Bullshido! Take a look around, my friend. Do you really think what you're learning is good for self defense? Sorry, that was a rhetorical question, and I know how much rhetoric confuses you.

    I've seen your type a thousand times. You don't want to make the commitment to getting to the gym to train, so you'd rather read a book and watch an instructional video and feel like you're making incredible progress in your warrior training. You watch people around you pour out sweat in the Muay Thai gym, Kyokushinkai dojo, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu academy, Judo dojo, etc., and you feel so supperior because your "art" is based on more scientifically sound "principles." Meanwhile you play Everquest for 9 hours per day and watch your waistline expand.

    Am I right? Again, I'm sorry -- that's more rhetoric. I won't do a page by page, line by line rebuttal of the SCARS website. You are the only person here who would benefit from such a thing, and I think you're less than receptive to it. But I will point out two things I saw: The term "Damage Multiplier" and "Knights of SCARS." Seriously look at those terms and tell me this "art" was not invented by rabid Dungeons & Dragons players.

    Well, I'm off to train Jiu-Jitsu. Tonight I'll have to ask my instructor where he keeps the 18-sided dice. How could you possibly have an effective fighting style without some? Have fun with your books and instructional tapes. I'm sure if you purchase enough of them one day you'll be invited to become a Knight of SCARS.

    Seriously though. You win. I'm done argueing with you. I couldn't possibly beat someone with your intellect. Not to mention your level 5 resistance to magic spells, rockets, women, logic, and common sense, and your level 10 acceptance of peer pressure and the need to belong to a group.
    Last edited by Strat_Tones; 10/29/2004 4:15pm at .

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    291
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Strat_Tones
    Effective martial arts don't attempt to solve every variable. It just isn't possible. Ask your BJJ instructor what you should do if your opponent is trying to punch you in the face when you are attempting an arm bar from the guard. Here is what he'll probably say: "Try to avoid it and keep working for the arm bar." In real life you can't defend everything, and if you want to get an arm bar you might have to eat some punches"
    That was my one of my main issues with EPAK back in the day when I was but a mere foolish practitioner trying to emulate what I saw in the movies. There was just too much scientific mumbo jumbo and not enough practicality. And not to mention the vast abundance of beer bellies amongst the higher ranks (top instructor included). Oh, and thanks for the sig material. Right now I have a left puffy top eye lid from being hit with a punch mitt by my boxing instructor and a red mark going vertically down my right eye from grappling. No pain no gain.

Page 6 of 6 First ... 23456

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO