Fighting arts and credibility

[SamuraiAssassin]

I posted this on another thread but I would like some fresh views on the topic.

I have a serious question, is there another way to prove the applicabilty of a fighting art other then modern day competitions or video footage?

By this I mean could there be proof in the history of the people who created it?

The only reason I say this is because there are other fighting arts out there like Filipino art forms or Indonesian art forms. Filipinos fought off many countries by hand and stick and are famed for their knife fighting yet they have no roots in MMA competitions. THey have never had a serious contender in the UFC nor do I think their schools really care too (generalization). But does this make them inferior?

[Omega Supreme]

I posted this on another thread but I would like some fresh views on the topic.

I have a serious question, is there another way to prove the applicabilty of a fighting art other then modern day competitions or video footage?

By this I mean could there be proof in the history of the people who created it?

The only reason I say this is because there are other fighting arts out there like Filipino art forms or Indonesian art forms. Filipinos fought off many countries by hand and stick and are famed for their knife fighting yet they have no roots in MMA competitions. THey have never had a serious contender in the UFC nor do I think their schools really care too (generalization). But does this make them inferior?

Wrong forum.

You're an idiot.



Welcome to bullshido now wipe your ass, I mean face.

[dramaboy]

I posted this on another thread but I would like some fresh views on the topic.

I have a serious question, is there another way to prove the applicabilty of a fighting art other then modern day competitions or video footage?

By this I mean could there be proof in the history of the people who created it?

The only reason I say this is because there are other fighting arts out there like Filipino art forms or Indonesian art forms. Filipinos fought off many countries by hand and stick and are famed for their knife fighting yet they have no roots in MMA competitions. THey have never had a serious contender in the UFC nor do I think their schools really care too (generalization). But does this make them inferior?

Yeah, I think the applicability of a martial art can be proven by what somebody said that he heard from somebody that it like really happened in the past and how it was sooo awesome. I think you are like totally right.

Tomas :sleepy2:

[SamuraiAssassin]

Thanks for the idiot comment, give me a little room here i am new to this.

[HAPKO3]

The credibility of a fighting art is measured by the ability of it's practitioners to kick ass. Period. Nothing else matters.

[Omega Supreme]

Thanks for the idiot comment, give me a little room here i am new to this.

:booty:

bwahahahahah, I'm razzing you because I'm Filipino and I've done Kickboxing and MMA and your new.

[SamuraiAssassin]

The credibility of a fighting art is measured by the ability of it's practitioners to kick ass. Period. Nothing else matters.

SO by this you mean fight in a competition and that is how you judge an art or style on functionality? Or how it's practicality expressed in street combat or self defense?

Are those competitions the tell all and all?

I think so too if the people can kick ass then they can kick ass. There are inherently good fighters out there...but would you need it proven to you by way of prize matches or is reading about the forms or the style, the history of the people and the techniques used be good enough find out on your own?

I know we talked about the dog brothers so what about the indonesian arts like silat are they functional or percieved less functional due to the lack of modern evidence?

[Omega Supreme]

SO by this you mean fight in a competition and that is how you judge an art or style on functionality? Or how it's practicality expressed in street combat or self defense?

Are those competitions the tell all and all?

I think so too if the people can kick ass then they can kick ass. There are inherently good fighters out there...but would you need it proven to you by way of prize matches or is reading about the forms or the style, the history of the people and the techniques used be good enough find out on your own?

I know we talked about the dog brothers so what about the indonesian arts like silat are they functional or percieved less functional due to the lack of modern evidence?

Dan Inosanto.

[IzzyDaHedgehog]

is reading about the forms or the style, the history of the people and the techniques used be good enough find out on your own?

Not really, because:

1. History lies. It could be that the records of the style are exaggerated, the eyewitnesses were unreliable, or whatever else. The historical accounts could even be entirely made up, as many have accused Stav (some Nordic MA) of doing.

2. Now is not then. What worked back then wouldn't necessarily work now, different circumstances. A style invented to get troops in medieval China in shape and teach them some basic battlefield stuff might not translate well into a MMA setting.

3. The people might not have anything to do with it. Most formerly warlike and badass peoples (Celts, Teutons, Norsemen, Mongols) don't have a strong warrior tradition anymore and wouldn't necessarily know how to fight well.

There's probably more too.

[Kungfoolss]

Filipinos fought off many countries by hand and stick and are famed for their knife fighting yet they have no roots in MMA competitions.

Fought off? I don't recall the Filipino's doing this in the 1940's with the Japanese and not without the American's help. Ditto for 1898 when it came to the Spanish, contrary to myth, sticks and knives don't win wars.