We addressed this sort of question in the first thread in this forum. I proposed then (as now) that discussions of hybrid European and Asian styles such as SAMBO and Bartitsu would be fine for the WMA forum as long as the discussion remained focused on the WMA aspects, allowing for whatever sensible digressions were necessary to maintain useful conversation/learning.
The "danger" is that, as has happened on many other WMA forums on other MA message boards over the past ten years or so, "Western" is assumed to mean "everything not from Asia" and the forum ends up becoming a kind of miscellaneous file.
Thus, this is not the place to discuss truly interesting topics such as Native American, African nor Middle Eastern MA, unless the topic also somehow revolves around WMA.
I think an everywhere else forum could be pretty interesting. There's a lot of interesting martial traditions from neither Eastern or Western civilization. It would have to be mostly an academic one though, since I doubt we have many practitioners of these styles.
An "everywhere else" forum was actually the suggestion that (eventually) led to this forum. I agree that it would be very interesting. Technically, MABS is supposed to be the venue for serious historical discussion, and we have had a few good threads in there over the past couple of years, although they get interrupted by people confused by the fact that they're not Bullshido "investigations".
Go back far enough and we actually had a History forum, which IMO was one of the most interesting areas of this site.
Does it really mater?
How many threads do we have on great-Zimbabwian shield and spear or Abbasid wrestling?
If and when we can surely create a sub-forum?
Hi. Thanks for the book.
What is the difference between the 1944 version and the 1959 version?
The problem is the past was that threads on little-known styles ended up in the YMAS Forum by default, because it is the "general martial arts" forum. However, because it's also the "comedy forum", those threads tended to fall apart and we lost some opportunities to learn about some interesting lesser-known martial arts.
Originally Posted by willaume
Fair comment mate,
Originally Posted by DdlR
I can see what you are getting at, and I supposed that it may not suit one group to be mixed with the other.
That being said, I would never have know of that American judo, if was not here.
and it is better here than in the YMAS....
Not much really. I believe that the '44 edition has one additional technique which was not included in the '59 edition.
Originally Posted by slower
IMS, the '59 edition even uses the same photos. Makes sense because the publisher/writer doesn't have to go to the expense and headache of doing new photos or drawing new illustrations. However, it's not unheard of, by any stretch, for a second addition or abridgment to have totally new or updated pics. A perfect example is Allanson-Winn's "Boxing." The earlier edition has different photos and drawings from the latter (the latter is better for the most part). And I would really have appreciated it if Cosneck had done his Military/Police training photos in something other than speedos. I tell ya, it's really strange looking at a picky of a guy showing a LEO arrest and pat-down technique wearing 1940's wrestling trunks. :P The '59 edition would have been the perfect excuse for Cosneck to go put on a Coast Guard duty uniform or something.
But that's one of the things that makes Cosneck's manual unique among the WWII "Combatives" manuals.
Peace favor your sword,
As goofy as it looks, the old school wrestling trunks look like the ideal garb for a fighting instructional photo series. It allows for a more precise view of what's going on, IMHO.
Originally Posted by lklawson
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO