Tactics Vs. Martial Art

[BlackCatBonz]

the dictionary describes tactical as (im just using one definition here) 2. as means to end: done or made for the purpose of trying to achieve an immediate or short-term aim. whenever i think of tactical, i think of training techniques or strategies for certain situations that will do just what the definition says: a+b=c sorta thing. quick and easy for the most part.....and practiced so many times they become automatic responses.
this is the way the military teaches hand to hand. is this a good method for self defense? i think so. you can teach a large group of people a core group of effective techniques rather quickly. does this make them a better fighter than a guy who has been studying an art for 10 years? i dont think so, simply because the guy studying the art has learned a different approach that would allow him IMO to act more naturally with or without a weapon in any situation.

 

[Cruentus]

Yes, and to be trained in the art of war you need all of them. But the question wasn't techniques vs tactics, it was martial arts vs tactics.

I only put "VS." because people often say "I train knife tactics" or "I train in a knife art." People often will differentiate that they do one or the other. Obviously, they don't have to "Vs." each other, though.

 

[loki09789]

Loki was this caught on the Modern Arnis Symposium tapes or not?

No, I am such a master of the technique that I move faster than the camera can record....

 

[loki09789]

the dictionary describes tactical as (im just using one definition here) 2. as means to end: done or made for the purpose of trying to achieve an immediate or short-term aim. whenever i think of tactical, i think of training techniques or strategies for certain situations that will do just what the definition says: a+b=c sorta thing. quick and easy for the most part.....and practiced so many times they become automatic responses.
this is the way the military teaches hand to hand. is this a good method for self defense? i think so. you can teach a large group of people a core group of effective techniques rather quickly. does this make them a better fighter than a guy who has been studying an art for 10 years? i dont think so, simply because the guy studying the art has learned a different approach that would allow him IMO to act more naturally with or without a weapon in any situation.

It isn't just h2h that is taught that way, it is the whole kit n' kaboodle. Read, react, assess and plan.... it is a scientific approach that focuses on external outcomes and goals. This is different from 'art' because 'art' generally speaking is:

High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.

So it depends on what you want to focus on. If you primarily focus on the quality of your execution of technical skill through drill and form, than you are an 'artist.' This doesn't mean that you are not developing tactical sense, just that you are focusing on the artistic.

If you are primarily focusing on the outcome, the maneuvering, the application and you train the techniques and skills with that goal in mind, you are a tactician.

Personally, since my approach is self defense focused, I would say I am more 'tactitican' than 'artist.' But, I do get really jazzed when I hit those epiphanies of movement and understanding that feel like artistic enlightenment.....and then they go away but they are addictive.

 

[Tgace]

Good post. An "art" analogy Ive been trying to frame is the Potter.

A potter can be a "utilitarian" and make simple cups, pots etc. Or an "artist" and make vessels that are more sculpture than household impliments.

An "artist" potter can also make simple, utilliatrian vessels and his advanced skill will show through in the lines, composition and finer detail of his work.

A "utilitarian" potter, simply based on the volume of his work, can start to show elements of "art" as his ideas, beliefs and experience start to show in his work.

In the end though as long as the pot is properly constructed, each will serve its desired function no matter who made it.

 

[loki09789]

Good post. An "art" analogy Ive been trying to frame is the Potter.

A potter can be a "utilitarian" and make simple cups, pots etc. Or an "artist" and make vessels that are more sculpture than household impliments.

An "artist" potter can also make simple, utilliatrian vessels and his advanced skill will show through in the lines, composition and finer detail of his work.

A "utilitarian" potter, simply based on the volume of his work, can start to show elements of "art" in his work after a while as his ideas, beliefs and experience starts to show in his work.

In the end though as long as the pot is properly constructed, each will serve its desired function no matter who made it.

Yeah, but if the 'utilitarian' potter is an 'artist' in self promotion...he can make millions by calling it 'minimalism' and never really have to do a thing different....

just kidding. Good comparison.

I think for most MAists the confusion over 'art' and 'tactic' is really knowing what the difference is instead of simply apeing what you hear/see from others in terms and motion. Know what you want out of your training and be honest about what you are doing. The rest is fluff and ego.

 

[Cruentus]

No, I am such a master of the technique that I move faster than the camera can record....

I wish we caught it on tape. Either due to blinding masterful speed, or the fact that I was across the room and had to teach during the same session, I missed it. :ultracool

 

[loki09789]

I wish we caught it on tape. Either due to blinding masterful speed, or the fact that I was across the room and had to teach during the same session, I missed it. :ultracool

Both....only because I didn't want to give up my 'secret style' to the rest of the attendees...it was a 'tactical' (ooooooooo! I tied it back to the topic!) maneuver to position you on the other side of the room so you couldn't see...

or as Pee Wee Herman use to say: "I meant to do that" (until he got caught in a certain ah hem, movie theater - then it became "It wasn't me!"). IF you play the DVD backwords you can hear "Walrus" like messages too..

In reality, what I was doing on the DVD was far less 'art' than it was drills and skills that were designed to promote 'tactical' sense with the "Pickle" drill and such. Since I focus on self defense and deal primarily with adults/young adults, the 'internal/artistic' development is reinforced more by the atmosphere in the training area that allows for adaptation/individualization once the fundamental mechanics are understood and are the basis for any individualizaiton of techniques. FMA 'conceptual' training is easy to 'translate' to 'tactical' mentallity because both use the same mentallity - just for different purposes. That may be why, at times, FMA/Kenpoka have a hard time drawing a distinction between the two.

 

[[email protected]]

Hello Everyone,

This has been an interesting topic but one that often gets confusing with the terminology, and application of martial arts practice.

Tactics has a variety of definitions, such as “ the branch of military science dealing with detailed maneuvers to achieve objectives set by strategy” or “Plan of action of strategy to achieve particular objective.” Or even “ Tactic are specific techniques or actions developed by the stakeholders used to achieve a planned strategy (usually a one year time frame). Tactics are how the strategies are to be achieved.” Over the last few years you are starting to see the term “tactics” or “tactical” as a buzz word to indicate that the Martial Art being practiced has something different to offer, usually on the combative end and not just for health and physical fitness benefits!

But how does this relate to something termed a “Martial Art” ?? For some reason the term Martial Art has become a view of something that is watered down from some type of earlier combative practice. In some arenas maybe this is the case but not in all practices. Like any other body of knowledge a martial art starts with some foundations in basic practice and eventually progresses to “art form”. An art is the expression of feelings, and the movement or creation of expression through various means. This is a practitioner’s true expression of feelings and self -expression of what he/she has been taught over time. Linking in “tactics” as a method of employing an overall strategy to survive or overcome an opponent. What most people often speak about is the training methodologies used in becoming a skilled practitioner, as many have mentioned in their posts here.

So look at whatever you are practicing with a discerning eye. Does your art contain aspects that relate to surviving a real world encounter? Does it wrap sparring, scenarios based training, application drills, attribute development, legal issues, medical management, tactics, strategies….. into one seamless and cohesive process? If not, then that may not what you may be looking for.(or maybe it is!)


Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.

www.Bujinkandojo.net