ANY Fighting Style can work if you train it right.

Discussion in 'General Martial Arts Talk' started by DaveB, Jul 13, 2017.

  1. drop bear

    drop bear Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    11,918
    Likes Received:
    2,245
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Really?

    And if boxing were a fighting style rather than a sport it would have some method of coping with grappling attempts or would expand to develop them.

    Then boxing would be doing a different style.
     
  2. drop bear

    drop bear Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    11,918
    Likes Received:
    2,245
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Yes it is circular. People are capable of skills because their style equips them.

    Boxers spend time learning how to hit properly. How properly you learn how to hit determines how well you hit.

    Style.
     
  3. drop bear

    drop bear Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    11,918
    Likes Received:
    2,245
    Trophy Points:
    263
    If.
    What is your evidence this is the case?

    And 2% is still 2%. Not 0%
     
  4. Buka

    Buka Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    3,469
    Trophy Points:
    448
    Location:
    Maui
    All you had to do was ask, bro.
    BananaCrop.jpg

    BananaLevitateCrop.jpg
    I know it was a small banana, but I'm kinda scared of heights.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
  5. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I can see where you are coming from, but I disagree. I'll try to take each point in turn because your well thought out answer deserves a detailed response.

    1. Tactical implications, such as decision making.

    Yes, I totally agree. Style does affect decision making. If I am a karate guy I'm almost never going to chose to shoot for a double leg takedown where I might if I'm a jujitsu guy.

    But, how do I go from Joe Nevertrained to expert karate fighter?
    I train. There's nothing else to it but training.

    So stylistically I'm encouraged to go for x technique over y technique.

    How do I land technique x? How do I set it up? How do I know when I should go for something different because it's not safe?

    Training.

    Because even if your style comes with a book of theory explaining when and why to do x, y and z techniques, good training will illuminate any flaws in those theories.

    You see, this is how I know guys like drop bear are just clinging to this idea of style relevance in order to have something to bash: in a different conversation my argument is their argument.

    Train with hard contact to work out what works and what's b.s..
    Well if you do that but keep an analytical mind, your not just going to throw stuff out, you are going to learn what you need to do to hit with a short punch or to take someone's balance with aiki principles etc.

    It's a natural progression of their same message.

    2. Style impacts the attributes you choose to develop.

    Again, completely agree. Style influences your specialisms.
    How do you execute a specialism like ground fighting? You train to get into position and deal with obstacles and counters and to develop the attributes you need to pull it off. If your training is lacking you won't be successful.

    Training is still the decisive factor.

    3. The manner in which you understand physical altercation.

    This I disagree with. It may affect how I view my tactical options, because I only have the options I've developed in training. But Understanding is down to experience. Again how much I've been exposed to through my training.

    Can you argue that individual styles offer limited training experiences due to having classes filled with people doing the same thing? Sure. But it's up to the teacher to improve the breadth of your training. It's not a weakness of the system of fighting.

    4. Physical differences. I'm not sure what exactly your referring to, can you elaborate.
     
  6. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    You defeated your own point.
    So fix the training and you fix the flaw.

    The trouble is you are conflating style and training. Yet boxing only trains as you describe because of competition rules, not because of fight philosophy. This is actually the difference between a sport and a martial art, but that's a separate issue.

    Even if/especially if boxing was an ma again, there's nothing stopping the boxer from changing up his training to handle a wider range of attacks.
     
  7. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    1, not necessarily. The development may just be tactical movement and striking to preemptively disrupt grapple attempts. Not necessarily new techniques.

    2. So what? Only historians and the faithful believe in preserving arts without letting them grow or adapt. Look how many variations of wing chun there are.

    3. How is that quote saying style doesn't matter because people can train other styles? Why after I've repeated my quite simple point so many times is it so hard for you to stick to it and not invent random straw men?
     
  8. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    And what do boxers call learning how to hit properly???
    Training maybe?

    How properly you learn is more commonly referred to as...
    How well you train?

    Training style? Yes. Fighting Style? No.

    Peekaboo = a fighting style.
    Philly shell = a fighting style.
    Hitting focus pads in combination = training.

    But this is progress.
     
  9. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I never said it was 0%, I said it is insignificant in comparison to.

    My unbiased analytical assessment of martial arts is my evidence (I'm an analyst by trade). Not to mention that despite your huge desire to style bash you just said so yourself without realising it.

    Also if I have to provide evidence so do you.
     
  10. Midnight-shadow

    Midnight-shadow Black Belt

    Joined:
    May 29, 2016
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    58
    If a boxer starts training to use and defend against kicks is it still boxing? Also it seems logical that the sport rules would come from the fighting philosophy, not the other way round. I haven't looked too deeply into this but don't boxers have the philosophy that kicks are too risky and unnecessary to bother with and therefore train with just punching in mind? The boxing community then made the rules of the sport around this philosophy? Of course, nowadays boxers train based on the sports rules, but I doubt it was always like that.

    Surely people have to be practicing a Martial Art before the sport was invented.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2017 at 4:41 AM
  11. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    The rules of boxing exist to make a fair competition and to reinforce safety. Before that boxers punched kicked elbowed and grappled.

    Once it became a rule defined sport it ceased to be a martial art as it did what it did for other reasons than preservation from violence.

    As to the general point of a style changing, They always have and hopefully always will. As I said earlier, if you can have countless styles within an art all based on variations and additions why should it be a problem to adapt your training.

    That being said, I define a fighting style by it's principles. That is rules/guidelines that you adapt into techniques. So as long as my body is obeying the physical rules and my use of a technique is obeying tactical/strategic rules then you are not IMO altering the style.
     
  12. Midnight-shadow

    Midnight-shadow Black Belt

    Joined:
    May 29, 2016
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    58
    Ok, I've done a bit of reading and from what I can tell Boxing has never been used as anything but a sport. Even in Roman times it was only ever done as a sport. There may not have been many rules back then and fights were usually to the death, but it was still a sport. So in your opinion Boxing was never a Martial Art?

    I agree with you that a style is defined by the principles and that variations can occur as long as the principles still apply.
     
  13. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I've seen references to boxing and wrestling as martial arts, taught alongside fencing in Europrean martial arts schools hundreds of years ago, but I could be mistaken.
     
  14. jobo

    jobo Master Black Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2017
    Messages:
    1,373
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    103
    this discussion is turning quite bizarre, not only have you not defined boxing you haven't defined sport

    any system that can only be apples according to rules is a sport, so all boxing that has a referee( or even a gentleman agreement) is a,sport, however the boxing skill set can be used anywhere, to attack others to defend ones self, at that point it isn't being used as a sporting contest, so isn't by defintion a sport?
     
  15. Midnight-shadow

    Midnight-shadow Black Belt

    Joined:
    May 29, 2016
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    58
    I'm with you there, it's DaveB that is under the impression that something can't be both a sport and a Martial Art at the same time. If you believe that then Boxing (which has only ever been used as a sport) isn't a Martial Art.
     
  16. jobo

    jobo Master Black Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2017
    Messages:
    1,373
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    103
    boxing under a rule set has only ever been a sport, but much the same is true of all ma, unless it getting on to the silly discussion that only battlefield fighting is martial
     
  17. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    The point about boxing being a sport is just to explain why boxers don't train to defend kicks or takedowns.

    Of course you can use boxing to fight, but that is not the purpose of the game of boxing.

    As fighting is not the purpose, there's no reason to expect a boxer to have a takedown defence etc. So trying to justify the idea of the "boxing fighting style" being a relevant factor in fighting because of what it is lacking is a red herring.
     
  18. DaveB

    DaveB Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I define martial arts as systems or methods of fighting for the purpose of preservation against violence. Purpose is key.

    Boxing is a competition with the aim of winning either by points or knockout where points are scored by landing blows with the front part of a gloved fist.
    Everything else about boxing is based on those limitations. The "style" is shaped by the rules and objectives of the competition.

    If points were scored only when blows hit the tummy and head shots got you penalised, boxers would not guard the head ever. But head shots are entertaining and so far not too lethal for public consumption so for now boxing happens to be useful for fighting because there is enough overlap between it and most real life situations.

    Just like 400m sprinting. Arguably the best self defence skill one can learn, but not a martial art.
     
  19. jobo

    jobo Master Black Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2017
    Messages:
    1,373
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    103
    a couple of points, there are people who learn and practise boxing for self defence purposes or to preserve against violence if you wish. Therefore by your own defintion it then becomes a ma.
    second, I had a fighting method long before I took up ma, the purpose was to preserve against violence, your defintion would include my clumsy fighting as a ma,as that was its purpose and purpose is key
     
  20. Steve

    Steve Mostly Harmless

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    13,475
    Likes Received:
    2,105
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Covington, WA
    Wait. You don't think boxing is a martial art? Just trying to keep up here.
     

Share This Page