Posted On:9/02/2005 9:31am
Style: Arnis, judo, Taichi
The statement complete martial system has come up a lot lately in conversations i have been having. I have heard several definitions from several different folks and I was curious what you folks thought. I think a system is complete if it contains.
1. Striking techniques. (kicks, punches, eye gouges….ect)
3. Ground fighting (hold downs, arm bars, chokes…ect.)
I would also like to add that a complete system and complete training program are two different things in my view. For example for a training program to be complete you would have to add.
5.) Conditioning (weights, cardio, whatever.)
6.) Research of other styles. (The whole know your enemy thing.)
Please tell me what you think
**** you math class
Posted On:9/02/2005 9:46am
Style: TKD, Ballet, Archery
It has to have a subject and a predica... oh wait.
Why does a system have to contain striking, ground fighting, throws, and weapons, all in one? I sure don't go to archery for unarmed combat.
Posted On:9/02/2005 9:56am
I am not saying a system has to contain all those things Mega. What I am saying is that complete systems should contain all those things. If you have some different ideas about what defines a system as complete please share.
Posted On:9/02/2005 9:58am
Conditioning should be included in "the system".
Posted On:9/02/2005 10:04am
I have yet to find a complete system. And to complicate things even more, those 'complete' systems that I thought I found always place emphasis in certain areas, while barely touching others. To make it even worse, each person is different and has unique needs - so what is complete for them might not be complete for you.
The best I have hoped for is to cross train as much as you can/want in the specialized areas and pull it together yourself. The system is YOU.
Originally Posted by Planktime
If you have some different ideas about what defines a system as complete please share.
It just has to teach everything that's relevant. I don't take archery to learn how to grapple and wouldn't want to take a striking art to learn how to use a tulwar.
Posted On:9/02/2005 10:12am
Yrkoon is correct. A martial art/style may lack of something you have to seek in other ones.
Crosstraining will "bridge the gaps".
Also, since there are different arts and styles, they may evolve independently.
Posted On:9/02/2005 10:17am
Mega, that is possibly one of the best answers I have heard to that question. Would you say that some types of techniques are more valid that others, or would you say that it is all situational. For example would you follow the idea that someone in Indonesia would need to study different groups of techniques then someone in the USA?
BTW Yrkoon I agree with you there is no complete system out there you MUST cross train to keep from being vulnerable to attacks from all angles.
Posted On:9/02/2005 8:11pm
Most so called complete systems have a major drawback: they are just too complex to really train in all those cool features the system offers... which mostly results in a practiconer who who knows a bit of everything but nothing particularly well ... at least not for the next 10-20 yrs...
Posted On:9/02/2005 8:25pm
Style: JKD, BJJ
Hmmph ... so far the complete - est systems I've encountered are the ones that are the most LITERALLY martial, the ones designed for killing and maiming people quickly. That'd be the FMA's, since I can -- without using anything I learned in any class but Kali, go from weapons to empty hand to the ground without pausing.
Monkey Ninjas! Attack!
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info