Posted On:6/28/2006 3:17pm
this TKD nutrider practically begged me to watch all 4 of the best of the best movies.
the first one was the best, however, the bar fight scene isn't any more credible than any other martial arts bar fight scene in any movie.
I here "brazil brawl" has a good BJJ bar fight scene with lot of flying armbars and such...
Posted On:6/28/2006 3:18pm
Style: BJJ, WMA
Originally Posted by GoldenJonas
Well written, good..............wait a minute!!! did you say "many 3 0n 1", "many 2 on 1", and a fucking "8 on 1".
Well, it WAS well written until you turned yourself into Phillip Rhee from the bar-room fight in Best of the Best circa 1989.
Another delusional LARPer...
And WTF is with all these idiots coming out of the woodwork with long rambling posts this week?
Originally Posted by Happycrow
Well, at least we can see which cheek you turned.
I had to take three once. If I could drag myself out of that, even as a broken bloody eggshell of my former self, I see no reason why somebody with vastly better conditioning and long experience couldn't do better.
Even if that's true, fighting multiple opponents isn't a fucking linear scale of difficulty. Fighting two guys may be twice as hard as one, but when you have three free-thinking able-bodied assholes ready to beat your face in, that's a hell of a lot more difficult... Let alone eight?!
I'm sorry, but unless you're fighting blind circus midgets, I don't buy the winning against eight attackers story.
Last edited by GranoblasticMan; 6/28/2006 3:25pm at .
Posted On:6/28/2006 3:19pm
Style: Muay Thai , BJJ
You've been here a long time. Thats awesome. You also just jumped onto this month's troll bandwagon. Congrats.
P.S. I blame you Omega. You showed the trolls a new subject they could cling to. (Not really calling the OP a troll its just a general statement)
Posted On:6/28/2006 3:22pm
Style: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu
Originally Posted by Reis
So basically in your post you're saying that HKD and KA can train you to fight and win consistently against multiple opponents, and that anyone who says that no martial art short of weapons can train you against multiple opponents is a BJJ nutrider? Am I right? What about people who practice Sambo or Judo who say that no MA can train you to take on multiple opponents, are they BJJ nutriders as well? That's the vibe I seem to be getting from your post. What about this following quote?
According to his profile, he's a judo practitioner with experience in ITF TKD? How does that make him a BJJ nutrider?
I think all he is saying is:
1) Ultimately, virtually all martial arts styles (karate, TKD, etc.) come from effective fighting arts (or effective fighters).
2) Any art can be effective if trained properly. Karate/TKD/HKD does not necessarily equate to McDojo suckage. BJJ, Kickboxing, Judo etc. does not automatically equate to kick-ass fighting art.
3) Every range of combat is important; there is nothing wrong with emphasizing one over another, as long as you learn enough of the others and don't leave a gaping hole in your skill set.
4) Style is only important in how well it is expressed by the fighter.
I think that captures the worst of it. I suspect it was inspired by all the BJJ nutriding that goes on around here -- which, I must admit, is pretty damn rampant (and I say that as a current BJJ student).
I would add that alot of the nutriding is generally the product of the younger generation (let's say under 30) who are often exuberant but short-sighted, in the greater scheme of things.
Originally Posted by DngrRuss1
Before I continue, let me qualify my rant by saying that I like grappling. We grapple in my school. I encourage my students to work the ground so that they understand the fundementals of grappling and, ultimately, get away from the ground.
So you teach crappling?
Nothing in several years of hapkido made me qualified to grapple, let alone instruct.
1% Shark is better than you.
Posted On:6/28/2006 3:24pm
My pet peeve:
There are NOT 4 ranges of fighting. Trapping is NOT a range. Stop living a lie and learn the definition of grappling.
Last edited by WhiteShark; 6/28/2006 3:28pm at .
nuthin' ta f*ck with
Posted On:6/28/2006 3:25pm
Style: MT/SUB GRAPPLING
Progressive thinking does not dwell on art VS art, rather it swinishly grasps knowledge, experience and rectifying weakness.
If you don't know BJJ or an art that incorporates it, then you have weakness.
Posted On:6/28/2006 3:26pm
Style: BJJ, wrestling
I don't want to get into a flame war, but I want you to ask yourself one question.
In your opinion, was Royce Gracie such a gifted physical specimen that if his style were something other than BJJ, for instance TKD, do you think that he still would have won the first UFCs?
Bottom line here, it was the style known as BJJ that won the early UFCs...
that was the whole point of them putting in Royce, to prove the STYLE was better.
They purposely used one of the smaller, less intimidating brothers to promote their STYLE. Rickson at the time could have EASILY dominated any of the fighters in the UFC, but they didn't want a big muscular looking guy in there, that defeated the purpose of them trying to show that it was the style not the person.
Look... to be effective in the cage/ring today, it is imperative you know BJJ.... you cannot say that about ANY OTHER martial art.
Yes it is good to know boxing
Yes it is good to know MT
Yes it is good to know wrestling
Yes it is good to know Judo
Yes it is good to know (fill in the blank)
But it is a MUST to know BJJ nowadays. The style (there is that word again) was so dominant that it is one of the building blocks of any proffesional fighter that is worth a damn today.
Chuck Liddell FYI is very good at BJJ (purple I believe)... he is good enough at it to know that if he can keep the fight on his feet, he will do everything in his power to avoid a grappling match, because there are better and he knows it.
Of course the person is the number one factor..... afterall if someone isn't a "fighter" then they are going to get their ass handed to them regardless. But don't underestimate the style... it is much more a factor than YOU apparently realize.
BJJ no longer has the "Secret weapon" power it once had... but that should be a testament to the HUGE success of that style. It is so effective that it has ingrained itself into almost every fighters training regiment.
can you say that about TKD? or WC or KC or whatever.....? didn't think so.
give the STYLE its props.
cool image whiteshark!
Posted On:6/28/2006 3:27pm
No dagorilla he is whining because no one respects most kma arts.
And there is no reason they should.
I'd be willing to bet that most of those he considers "nutriders" have extensive experience with the crap that is KMA.
As for the "nutriding", there are only a few decent grappling styles (HKD isn't one of them). BJJ happens to be one that has been quite important in mma. That's not youthful exuberance it is fact.
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info