Wondering who's on the same page as me

[verc]

Just wondering what people agree/disagree with me on this board, since I'm new :)

I'm fairly moderate when it comes to BS martial arts. For example, I practice Muay Thai but I acknowledge its limitations as a limited grappling, and non weapon fighting style. And I also acknowledge that most MMA people I personally know train for tournaments and not self-defense, so that fact in itself more than their style may be a limitation in their effectiveness towards self-defense. I believe TKD as stipulated by guidelines from the World Taekwondo Federation to be a spurious form of self defense, but I have no doubt there are schools out there who teach an effective system of self defense yet choose to call their style "TKD" for one reason or another.

With regards to the hotly debated topic of historical chinese martial arts, I know that there are multiple threads which are often conflated. People tend to conflate the martial arts of the "temple" (which is quite an ambiguous term I do not claim to understand), the imperial court, and "village" (localized styles developed through lineage). I know that there was an imperial martial art practiced by the actual army, and that this martial art was no doubt effective since, well, China has always been at war throughout history. However I do not believe this martial art exists anymore, especially since wars are fought with guns and not swords and spears; the Boxer rebellion was probably the last historical event in which this kind of martial arts was practiced in combat. In fact this is my view on all truly traditional (as in ancient) martial arts. I do not count Pankraton as a "Martial" art since it was not practiced by the military -> some of you probably know more than me, but I believe the greek military discouraged Pankraton since weapons and armor and not naked fists were used in combat. But of course, many MMA practitioners today do not call their style a "martial art" anyways, just a "fighting system" or "self defense system".

I know that Japanese samurai practiced variety of "Ryu" but that this included things like swimming while wearing armor, medical assistance, and wilderness survival (no doubt these are just as important to the professional warrior as the combat!). I believe that in Okinawa, a band of locals did in fact develop a non-orthodox (at the time) martial art which was effective (I do not know exactly how effective) in combat against armed opponents, which eventually developed into Okinawan Karate. However, as the world has changed since the mid 19th century, I do not believe that Karate in its "original" form is effective for modern self defense. But I do believe that at some point it was effective for "street" self-defense, as in the street of 1850. This statement is not unreasonable; no one will disagree with me that modern mixed styles would not be as effective as other styles in another era.

In the self defense aspect, my belief is divided among demographics. I would rather send my young kids to a TKD school that teaches them to kick a would-be molester in a groin and run away, then a school of submission fighting and boxing. And indeed, most combat schools are going to teach children to kick their assailants in the groin and run, regardless of their fighting style. I'm sure those of you who are parents would agree with me. However, when my kids grow older I would rather them practice a more practical fighting sport, but also one which is more closely related to actual athletics so as to benefit him in school athletics as well, such as boxing or some grappling art (as opposed to some knife-fighting sysmtem). For women, I would most definately recommend MT or some no nonsense striking art since their strength cannot compare to the majority of male assailants, but first and foremost I would arm them with a nonlethal self-defense instrument (such as mace) but more importantly, train them in using it. (That is sort of a fighting system in itself, is it not?)

So yeah, I consider myself to be fairly moderate. I have known some people who practiced esoteric martial arts of questionable effectiveness (like mailorder "death touch" stuff) but they not been very "normal" people. On the other hand I know some very hardcore fighters, but they have not been very successful financially in life.



In between those two extremes, there are the many of us who see self defense as just that, and quasi-spiritual arts as just that. So I welcome any comments here, where you think I'm right or wrong, and what views you have.

[Ronin]

In the self defense aspect, my belief is divided among demographics. I would rather send my young kids to a TKD school that teaches them to kick a would-be molester in a groin and run away, then a school of submission fighting and boxing. And indeed, most combat schools are going to teach children to kick their assailants in the groin and run, regardless of their fighting style. I'm sure those of you who are parents would agree with me. However, when my kids grow older I would rather them practice a more practical fighting sport, but also one which is more closely related to actual athletics so as to benefit him in school athletics as well, such as boxing or some grappling art (as opposed to some knife-fighting sysmtem). For women, I would most definately recommend MT or some no nonsense striking art since their strength cannot compare to the majority of male assailants, but first and foremost I would arm them with a nonlethal self-defense instrument (such as mace) but more importantly, train them in using it. (That is sort of a fighting system in itself, is it not?)


In between those two extremes, there are the many of us who see self defense as just that, and quasi-spiritual arts as just that. So I welcome any comments here, where you think I'm right or wrong, and what views you have.

So you think that TKD is better for self defence for a child, but not for an adult?

[Don Gwinn]

Welcome to Bullshido. That's the last nice thing anyone's going to say to you for awhile.

What's up with the awesome FOOD tag?

[verc]

So you think that TKD is better for self defence for a child, but not for an adult?

I did not explicitly state that, but I apologize if I was unclear. What I stated was that there are certain priorities when it comes to self defense for children (namely, how to call for help, get an adult) and that it is more important to me that a school teach this to children, than what specific style that school is teaching.


I forgot to add my most important belief when it comes to FACTUAL historical evidence of the martial arts. Those of your who studied humanities at university will agree with me that evaluation of history is EXCEEDINGLY difficult. With respect to martial arts, I have only come across a couple doctoral dissertations on their history.

What I am saying is, difficult enough as history is to accurately compile, there has been very little work done by academics on martial arts history. (Perhaps in Japan there are some since Japanese universities offer degrees in martial arts, and I do not know the quality of those academic programs compared to leading institutions in the US and Europe) This is why I really hesitate to make any concrete judgement on historical martial art, and choose rather to present what I believe is "what I believe to be most likely" but always warn the person I am talking to that there research in this field is inadequate.

Bert

[verc]

Welcome to Bullshido. That's the last nice thing anyone's going to say to you for awhile.

What's up with the awesome FOOD tag?

haha, well I've browsed through these boards and seen some pretty nasty personalities, but I welcome any criticism of my views.

I am always trying to learn more afterall, and if someone has a different view than I do I welcome it as new knowledge or a viewpoint I haven't considered.

[Yrkoon9]

I am proud to be one of those nasty personalities.

[fanatical]

I do not count Pankraton as a "Martial" art since it was not practiced by the military -> some of you probably know more than me, but I believe the greek military discouraged Pankraton since weapons and armor and not naked fists were used in combat. But of course, many MMA practitioners today do not call their style a "martial art" anyways, just a "fighting system" or "self defense system".

I know that Japanese samurai practiced variety of "Ryu" but that this included things like swimming while wearing armor, medical assistance, and wilderness survival (no doubt these are just as important to the professional warrior as the combat!).

While commenting on only a small part of your post is like cutting it up, removing only the tasty bits and commenting only on that for the ease of being a critic, that's not really what I'm trying to do.

Why I picked this is because it flies in the face of what I consider martial arts. I can't for the life of me understand why you only judge martial arts as being used by the military. In my experience, martial arts and the history of it, has never been military. In fact, many styles pride themselves on histories from monks, or peasants or the like. The word "martial" in MA are in my opinion misplaced. Although some MA have a history of military use, I try to look to todays demands of the arts. First up is getting rid of the notion that what worked a thousand years ago, works equally good today in modern society. Due to restraints of different kinds (Law, moral & ethics, social structures, politics etc.) .. most things don't in several ways. Not just functional. Many things can be modified to fit better, but most don't. Thus you see a large quantity of techniques and training methods that are in fact, outdated.

For me. MA is a grouping of any training which leads to greater fighting prowess of any kind. Fighting is the point of pitting to people against eachother in some way. The word martial has the dictionary connotion of war, but apart from a very few select arts, this is rare.

This article has been posted before, please read through it.

http://www.grapplearts.com/Submissio...s-ju-jutsu.htm

It handles the issue of what you're really training for and from that, what your results will be. My point is trying to shine light on what MA were and what they are today..

[Edge]

Welcome to Bullshido. That's the last nice thing anyone's going to say to you for awhile.

What's up with the awesome FOOD tag?

Looks like FART to me.

[dakotajudo]

I forgot to add my most important belief when it comes to FACTUAL historical evidence of the martial arts. Those of your who studied humanities at university will agree with me that evaluation of history is EXCEEDINGLY difficult. With respect to martial arts, I have only come across a couple doctoral dissertations on their history.

What I am saying is, difficult enough as history is to accurately compile, there has been very little work done by academics on martial arts history. (Perhaps in Japan there are some since Japanese universities offer degrees in martial arts, and I do not know the quality of those academic programs compared to leading institutions in the US and Europe) This is why I really hesitate to make any concrete judgement on historical martial art, and choose rather to present what I believe is "what I believe to be most likely" but always warn the person I am talking to that there research in this field is inadequate.

I guess I find this kinda surprising, because I've found quite a few histories. The history of judo, for example, is pretty well established.

Where are you looking?

[Don Gwinn]

You should begin from the realization that a lot of the history you cited is not "factual" to borrow your term.