Posted On:9/09/2006 1:27am
Style: wagamichi shorei kempo
Litmus test for TMA...Bukinkan, Akido, kenjitsu, or the host of other "Bushi" Class warrior arts is this (And be truthful in your own self evaluation of the art you are spending countless hours training in.)
In your pursuit of the "Samurai" Arts. and even your mastery of them. or at least your sensei's or grand-masters mastery of them, If you could go back in time to feudal japan, when the real thing was walking around, would you last?
What I mean, and this is some hypothetical, If for some reason, you were taken back in time (like a bad movie plot) To help "the cause" would your training actually hold up? could you face a medieval man whose job it was to "kill" with or without a sword?
ALL PICS TAKEN AT RANDOM FROM GOOGLE:
Would this guy actually stand a chance?
I wont post a thousand Ninja pics but the world is full of this guy! Master Larpers that look like this, act like this, follow the "Old code" so to speak. The one they make up.
Now consider these guys. i don't even know who they are...Just a mma club.
Would they fair better? Would they be able to fight the deadly ninja and keep their lives?
I believe they would. They don't hold dear the "Codes that bind" I bet they don't bow to the "Shidoshi" when he walks into the dojo. I bet they could take a sword less samurai though.
Now if this is the case, If this MMA could go back in time and stand up to the real thing. (and I think it could). And if Akido or Krotty could not. Why study them? Why defend them as a viable fighting art where most even self admit that it is watered down after centuries of non-battlefield use?
Now I like some TMA and even study them. But I also do the "new" with the "Old". and the truth is a lot of the "old" is crap.
The new works. how do we know this? because some dude got in a cage and tried it.
How do we know the old works? Sensei said it does? Who told him? his teacher? And he heard it from a friend?
What is you guys take on what would work in a world that is not modern filled with dudes that really kill people?
When You absolutely have to hide a body...try Alaska.
Heel Hook Hunter
Posted On:9/09/2006 9:37am
1 on 1?
Ummmm I pick the dude with the sword.
Grandmaster Sensei of Village Idiocy
Posted On:9/09/2006 9:53am
Style: Kyokushin and Judo.
So what your saying is Mixed Martial Arts clubs turn out better fighters than other styles like Bujinkan or Aikido ?
This has only been stated hundreds of times within the last year.
Hannibal: The sworn enemy of dishonest politicians, source of entertainment on Bullshido and newly appointed Office Linebacker. Terry Tait ain't got **** on me !!!!
Posted On:9/09/2006 10:06am
I seriously doubt 99% of the people in MA training today, in vastly safer, more controlled, and less violent on a daily basis, cities and countries, would last more than one fight in a place where your fellow trained fighters knew how to sneak up really well on people and stab them from behind, or live fighting hand to hand. The MMA guys probably stand a better chance in a bar fight than ninja boy there (for all we know though, that guy takes off his shirt and is just as built as the guy kneeling down, although I doubt it).
I don't believe that any modern practitioner of MA, be it 'new' or 'old,' trains they way they probably did 500, 1000, or 2500 years ago. You consider a fight in a ring, with rules and a referee to stop it if one gets hit in the groin or the back of the head or whenever, the proving ground for MA. It's the proving ground for MA in the ring, but not on a road where 4 bandits lure you into a trap, swinging a club or knife. The ring can give an idea who (but not what art necessarily) fights better in a one on one confrontation w/o weapons, but it is difficult to make the leap out of the ring.
The moment you toss on variables, what MA works better becomes much more hypothetical. Against samuri swing swords? Should probably know weapon defense and sword work. Against gangs? A lot of standing escapes/manuevering/strikes. Bar fight? MMA. Very few single schools teach all of this under one banner. Most places have a combination of different arts, which when put together probably gives you a closer idea to how people used to train (not just one thing or the other, but a variety of ground, stand-up, and weapons).
The biggest thing holding modern practitioners back in any situation, is that we do not train to kill. We can kill (a chokehold held on will kill, as will a knife strike to the throat or abdomin, and so on), but how many can honestly say they are prepared to do so in a fight? Until you've been there, you won't know. We can all say what we want (I would never kill somebody! I have no problem killing somebody attacking me!), but actually facing mortality adds on a whole different variable to any mix.
Posted On:9/09/2006 10:15am
Style: Karate, Sadism, Violence.
Originally Posted by pl4zM4
1 on 1?
Ummmm I pick the dude with the sword.
Posted On:9/09/2006 11:13am
Style: Bits and pieces
I'd contend that back in the day the guys that had to fight on a regular basis in life or death scenarios trained a lot closer to an MMA gym i.e. worked on all ranges of fighting, hard physical training, aliveness etc. than your local Bujinkan dojo.
Posted On:9/09/2006 11:25am
Style: FW Crane Kung Fu
So, this entire thread is like do MMA because it works and dont do TMA because its crap. Well then how do you know if its crap or not? if its watered down or not?
Maybe TMA is just too difficult for some people, you know like forms, techniques and all the other TMA ****, why bother when I can join local MMA gym, they kick and punch there, I will become strong..
Posted On:9/09/2006 11:33am
Style: Hiatus for Gen. Fitness
This sounds like the kind of conversation one has sitting around the hookah with a bunch of friends...
"Okay... so like... if you went back in time as a martial artist... no wait, like, if you train now, and had to go back in time... uh, could you survive?"
"Man, only if I was a ninja. It takes a ninja to kill a ninja, man."
Seriously? The only people that I think could hack it are the guys that are made for combat anyway. You see them occasionally, even without formal training they are natural brawlers, able to take a beating, etc. Train him up, send him back, and maybe he would do okay. Then again, maybe he'd catch an arrow in the chest, a knife in the back, a club to the skull.
The litmus test part is pretty funny, though, since a litmus test refers to something that you can actually test various things against. This would be a hypothetical litmus test, contradictory in terms of the meaning of a litmus test.
Last edited by CNagy; 9/09/2006 11:35am at .
Valiant Monk of Booze & War
Posted On:9/09/2006 11:47am
Which ever guy has a working sense of strategy and tactics.
I don't mean "If he throws x-punch, I can use it to set him up for this, take him down, and choke him out."
I mean the guy who knows how to walk into a room, look at it's occupants, look at the exits, and knows exactly how he's going to walk out of there in one piece, whether he has to fight or not.
That is the aspect of fighting which everyone, TMAers and MMAers seem to lack.
Posted On:9/09/2006 12:10pm
Yeah but can that kind of intution be taught?
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info