Discussion in 'Karate' started by Fuhrer Drumpf, Oct 7, 2017.
And with someone with a physics degree.
So is 'g'.
"yes but the very defintion of a constant is it applies everywhere on every occasion, as it doesnt apply to feathers on earth, which is where we live, except for in a vacuum chamber, then it clearly is not a constant"
No, that would be a Universal constant like 'c ( the speed of light in a vacuum)' and 'G" (the Universal gravitational constant). The acceleration due to gravity (g) is a constant in a given location and distance from the center of mass of the larger object..
no I'm saying that golf is not a good comparison with karate for the reasons i gave given
But tennis and gymnastics are?
yes and football, soccer and rugby, but not ten pin bowling or darts or golf
And I'm saying your reasons are not inherent to golf. There are some good reasons to say it's not a great analogy (I never really compared it to Karate), but those are not among them, IMO.
So, if we took your reasoning to soccer, the point of soccer is to get the ball in the goal eventually. If that ever happens, that's a success. Yet ten pin bowling, it seems by your classification, has no measurement of success, so if the ball makes it to the other end (whether it hits pins or not), you've done your job.
the issue is the complexity of the movement patterns, of which golf has very few and ten pin even less, the other was just was golf doesn't really count as a,sport, , as apart from finishing the,course in as long as you want in as many hits as you want it has no measure of success, ten pin as you point out does, its just not complicated enough to be compared to karate
And that is a valid reason to exclude ten-pin. Your reasons for excluding golf, however, remain specious. We'd have to define "sport" to determine if golf qualifies or not (most folks would likely say "yes").
The factors are different, but the fact remains that very few people manage to develop a good, repeatable golf swing without a lot of practice. That was the original point. And you knew that.
Golf and bowling don’t have a resisting opponent. The others do.
Did I just get into Jobo’s mind?
Now I’m out.
no the original point made by me, that you took issue with is golf doesn't have sufficiently complicated patterns to be comparable with karate, how long it takes you to get good at ONE movement doesn't change that.
people like to conflate games of skill with sports, snooker is a game, so is darts and as golf is no more athletic than either of those it would seem to fall in to the same cat,
Agreed. That's actually why I chose golf. He missed the point, entirely.
Again, I never compared it to Karate - you did.
And the lesser complexity of patterns is precisely the point. People take years to get good at golf, assuming they put in at least the hours a martial arts hobbyist would, in spite of the lack of a resisting opponent and the simpler overall approach. The swing is significantly more difficult than a punch to get good at (make the ball go where you intend), perhaps a bit more difficult than basic kicks, certainly less difficult than some kicks, though it requires more precision (lower fault tolerance).
WHAT! You mean we've been doing wrong all these years? See, that's what you get when you do things outside the dojo with your students. Every thing is a fight!
np i didn't you threw it in there as a comparison to how long it takes to learn to karate and i said it wasn't a good comparison
define get good at? Hitting it a hundred yards or so in the right direction is not at all difficult, anyone with reasonable hand eye co ordination should be able to do that in well under an hour, stopping it on a green is a bit more tricky, then master the put,to get down in three, let's say 3hours all in and you can play,
That's akin to having someone punch a bag. Easy to get good at. Harder to hit a moving target. Even harder to hit someone who's blocking. Even harder to hit someone hitting back. Golf is more than just hitting a ball 100 yards. Most people can't hit a distance shot with any sort of accuracy at all. Most can't hit onto a green reliably from 150 yards out (some not even from 100 yards out). Most struggle getting out of sand, hitting under obstacles, using abbreviated swings, hitting into or across the wind, hitting over obstacles, hitting to greens they can't see, playing over water, judging distances, controlling their distance, picking a reasonable approach to a given hole, putting anything that's not straight and level, hitting a knock-down shot, etc. There are far more variables than your statement implies, hence my comment about most people not being able to break 100 (not an artificial measuring point I made up - a comment made by Harvey Penick, IIRC).
????????, there,arnt ANY moving targets in golf, that one of the main reasons its so easy to learn,
There are moving targets. Seagulls, rabbits, squirrels, other golfers................
there not actually targets, more collateral damage
Separate names with a comma.