If an art has any sub-optimal components is that art bullshido?

**ezmoney** · Posted On: 2/13/2006 4:09pm

going back to the "sub-optimal" bit... If you're going to describe a lack of techniques in a range as being sub-optimal, then what MA isn't bullshido? The only thing you could possibly do is MMA with an emphasis on RBSD. Right? Even within the MMA community there are people who speciallize in different ranges, so there you have it, EVERYTHING is bullshido under that logic.

Different styles speciallize in different ranges, and either completely lack, or just have very weak skills, in the other areas. As long as both the teacher and students are aware of and realistic about these limitations, there's no problem. You'll probably end up with a better education from learning the different ranges from different people, anyway. If I just want to improve my stand up, I'm going to train with someone who has spent their life developing their stand up fighting. If I want to improve my ground, I'm going to train with someone who's done the same for their groundwork.

**CaptainHowdy** · Posted On: 2/13/2006 4:54pm

Originally Posted by Kidspatula

"Now, my students, I don't really know how to effectively deal with this scenario but I've been taught this series of techniques which probably don't actually work. That's what we're going to learn today!"

Yeah right...

Yeah, that was a pretty bad example I posted earlier.

I guess that I was just trying to say that even if your MA doesn't cover an aspect of fighting, it seems like there would still be a slight amount of overlap from your MA to another MA that covers a different aspect of fighting. A BJJ guy can throw punches, and no matter how weak they may be, they're still punches. That having been said, the BJJ guy can't hope to win a boxing tournament unless he himself has trains in boxing.

I still maintain that whether a MA has sub-optimal components is dependant upon the context of its application.

**Torakaka** · Posted On: 2/13/2006 9:00pm

what should happen, is that people who are not qualified to teach a certain area of fighting should say "I am only qualified to teach ** so for ** you should seek out instruction from someone who specializes in that".

**Spunky** · Posted On: 2/15/2006 4:59am

I sense rank inflation with the comparison chart :smile:, though its an interesting idea. How can someone be expected give objective input of relative scores, even before considering the likeliness of he/she not having had some experience with the other candidates? Would you intend on collecting and averaging scores from people somehow?

**Omar** · Posted On: 2/17/2006 3:01am

Originally Posted by omega

You know, come to think about it you should make a chart like this for all the arts and put it up on it's own page.

It should be a color coded pie chart and have a decent photo of someone doing one of the signature moves from the style on it and then we could print out playing cards.:ninja2:

**Katagelan** · Posted On: 3/26/2006 7:47pm

I see self defence dismissed by those who favour the sportive aspects.
What would you think of those who must learn to handle real fight situations for professional reasons ( bouncers, wardens, etc...) ?

**GIJoe6186** · Posted On: 3/26/2006 8:11pm

well the bouncers that I know learned pretty much nothing because they usually are bouncers just because of thier size. The only ones I know of that are trained in anything learned real basic BJJ.

**GIJoe6186** · Posted On: 3/26/2006 8:16pm

back on topic though if its sub-optimal and has no use at all dont fucking practice it. At my Kempo school they used to say "were not going to use the chamber in an actual fight but we train it for power and form." Or like KidSpatula said they would just say "well were not ground fighting experts but Kempo applies to everything so this is how to punch and how to defeat grapplers." So the solution is just stop doing the stupid crap not just pointing out to your students that its stupid. Example I still practice Kempo. I just practice it like a boxer without chambers and forms and ****. Just using combos on bags and in sparring. I also said Kempo was stupid for the ground so I take BJJ and my wrestling background.

**TehDeadlyDimMak** · Posted On: 3/26/2006 8:21pm

Originally Posted by GIJoe6186

back on topic though if its sub-optimal and has no use at all dont fucking practice it. At my Kempo school they used to say "were not going to use the chamber in an actual fight but we train it for power and form." Or like KidSpatula said they would just say "well were not ground fighting experts but Kempo applies to everything so this is how to punch and how to defeat grapplers." So the solution is just stop doing the stupid crap not just pointing out to your students that its stupid. Example I still practice Kempo. I just practice it like a boxer without chambers and forms and ****. Just using combos on bags and in sparring. I also said Kempo was stupid for the ground so I take BJJ and my wrestling background.

I'm sort of confused. If you practice Kempo like a boxer... is it still Kempo?

Just asking, but is there some distinct stylistic theme that makes it still Kempo?

**GIJoe6186** · Posted On: 3/26/2006 8:58pm

I dont know. When I practice my striking at the gym I go to people usually think Im a kickboxer of some sorts. But I do keep some Kempo style to my strikes. I use all sorts of strikes including backfists, hammers, forearms, slaps, palms as well as elbows and basic boxing techniques. Knee occassionaly and pretty much never kick. So yea its Kempo but not gay fag Kempo that America made it to be.