Principles Based Systems & "Sports"

**The Wastrel** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 11:50am

Are these two propositions contradictory?

1. Our system is based on principles, not techniques.

2. Our system does not work in a controlled environment with rules that prohibit certain techniques.

**MrMcFu** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 12:00pm

Wastrel, you are the man.

**Shooter** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 12:30pm

They're unrelated until someone cops out. ;)

**RobP** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 1:32pm

Any system has to work in a controlled environment unless you regularly injure or cripple your training partners. In a sporting context it depends largely on the rules I guessas to how effective it might be.

**The Wastrel** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 2:16pm

I believe this is what we call a "death blow". If you need me, I will be busy wiping the blood off my pen...er...keyboard.

**tiltpoint** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 2:28pm

er, not so sure. if the principle is something along the lines of 'slit the guys throat, no matter how,' there are venues where this wouldnt work. take for example thumb wrestling.

rules can be made to specifically counter principles as well as techniques...

**MrMcFu** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 2:38pm

Are you trying to stir up the ghosts of Tigerfly and Djimbe?

**Kungfoolss** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 2:49pm

Originally posted by The Wastrel
Are these two propositions contradictory?

1. Our system is based on principles, not techniques.

Nope. Of course that's assuming you know the difference between the two fundamentals.

2. Our system does not work in a controlled environment with rules that prohibit certain techniques.

This question is a bit misconstrued, if a system is predicated on the science of principles, the prohibition of techniques is not the issue, nor should it be.

**MrMcFu** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 2:59pm

I think the idea behind the principles based MA styles is that the techniques are virtually unlimited. Of course, if you say that rules prohbit certain techniques, then a spokesperson of whatever principle based MA you are talking about would definately say their system would be restricted because of any rules.

The real problem, in my opinion, is that principle based MAs are not completely honest with themselves. There are always certain guidelines that are followed in a particular MA, for example forward pressure. However, the idea that just following a certain principle somehow opens up a giant rainbow of possibilities and techniques by itself is fallicious. You still have to know what the hell to do after when you follow the "principle".

**Kungfoolss** · Posted On: 12/28/2003 3:24pm

Originally posted by tiltpoint

rules can be made to specifically counter principles as well as techniques...

The real problem is that certain individuals that are MMA/NHB/K-1/Boxing/Sumo or other sports-related arts, tend to blur the line between what they practice and what really occurs on the street or/and on a battlefield.

Take boxing as an example, how effective would a bjj fighter be if confined to the restrictions and rules of boxing? He'd most likely lose. The same goes for a kali stylist that favors carrying and utilizing a knife wherever he travels, then is told by a MMA/NHB he can't use it because that would be "unfair."

Therefore, it is a bit of a misconception that when a MMA/NHB or other tournament fighter believes he's humanities gift to combat because he wins titles and plastic trophies. Take them out of their element, and they are just as helpless as the TMA's they mock from the safety of their ring and tournament rules.

Recently, a deranged Japanese man armed with a knife went on a rampage cutting and slashing innocent bystanders for no apparent reason. One of his victims was a professional K-1 fighter, Genki Sudo. Genki Sudo fled the attack instead of confronting his attacker.