Youtube reliability

[yorkshirelad]

The reliability of you tube is dependant upon you. Like the rest of the web, there is no filter for the quality of the content. If you don't have the knowledge to discern what you are looking at, then it will be very hit or miss, with the latter more likely.
Take a peak at this thread: http://martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=95707. A good number of videos are presented, but if you have either no background or a very shallow background in sword arts, you will have a hard time commenting intelligently about them.

If you do know what you are looking at, you will have to do the work to sift through what is there and find what you are after, with the possibility that you may simply not find it.

Daniel

Exactly my point. I know what I'm looking for. If a video is posted and I accept the video as a decent representation of combative techniques, I'll critique accept it, and accept it!If I don't find what I'm looking for, I'll critique it and give you the reasons for my refusal to accept it. On the previous thread Daniel, we saw a video of a technique that was being touted as a realistic approach to a combative situation, both you and I dismissed it as an unviable option. We didn't do this because the technique has the potential to take someone's head off (which it does). We did it because the technique puts the user in a very dangerous position, a position that, under the circumstances the video portrayed is, quite frankly, unwarranted.

Now, the other posters tried to convince us that this was a viable combative technique and failed to do so. Then told us that there was a system that taught more of a combatives syllabus. When I asked to see it, they went crazy!

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Instead the whole thing became a crusade to prove what has turned out to be unproveable on this forum.

And therin lies the problem: nothing can really be proven on an internet forum. One may be able to get answers to questions from others, and hopefully, those answers will be reasonably accurate.

Daniel

 

[yorkshirelad]

and therin lies the problem: Nothing can really be proven on an internet forum. One may be able to get answers to questions from others, and hopefully, those answers will be reasonably accurate.

Daniel

qtf!

 

[Kittan Bachika]

It would be helpful to say which system of Kung Fu it is .
They are many and varied , some differing from each other like night and day.

The amount of systems and sub systems there are of Kung Fu would probably add up to more than the total of all other martial art styles on the planet and that's without even counting the Kung Fu systems that have been lost in antiquity.

So when you say Kung Fu that is a very broad term , it's a bit like saying " I bought a car " "Yeah what type of car"?

Kung Fu is Kung Fu to me. The only thing I care about is whether it is good or bad.

However, if you want clarification, I have sparred with a bunch styles. The fights that come to mind were Wing Chun and I think was Hung Gar.

I knew enough about the style knowing that the Wing Chun guy was going to give me a lot of trouble. He got in some good hits, but I got some good ones to also. But I did a lot of running away whenever he got too close.

Hung Gar guy outclassed me. I did not even touch him. Everything I threw at him he blocked or dodged. He barely touched me, not because I was blocking him, but because if he would have put me in the hospital. His control was great, he did not hurt me, but it was close enough to show it would have been bad news for me.

Btw, these weren't challenge matches. They were informal events with friends or friends of friends.

Like I said before about Youtube, using it as proof that one style is better is just dumb.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Using youtube to work out which art is better than the other is just silly. Rarely, if ever, does someone upload one of those vids just for fun, they almost always have an agenda, so they sift around and find a video proving their point and then upload it. I cant belive people waste their time watching youtube vids titled "tkd vs muay thai" or "karate vs kung fu", absolutely ridiculous.

 

[fangjian]

Using youtube to work out which art is better than the other is just silly. Rarely, if ever, does someone upload one of those vids just for fun, they almost always have an agenda, so they sift around and find a video proving their point and then upload it. I cant belive people waste their time watching youtube vids titled "tkd vs muay thai" or "karate vs kung fu", absolutely ridiculous.

This is not about what style is better.

It's just about how accurate or reliable youtube generally is in regards to depicting a decent representation of many styles.

ie. If you type' BJJ 'and know what videos or people to look for you, can get a decent representation of what it is all about.

If you type ' Kalaripayattu ' or ' Tahtib ' , what you find on youtube, might not be enough to establish too much of an opinion.

 

[Tez3]

YouTube is hugely useful for MMA fighters in this country. Most fights are posted up there either by friends of fighter, the promotions or the fighters themselves. The video quality can vary wildly but if you are matched with a fighter it gives you enough to see how they fight if you can watch some of their fights. We don't have much television coverage here and buying up videos of events is expensive (very little money in MMA here) so YouTube is invaluable for watching potential opponents. Some fighters have show reels they post up hoping to catch the attention of promoters etc, again it's cheaper way to do it, we don't have full time fighters as such.

Does it represent MMA worldwide as a whole? I don't know, it does represent grassroots MMA in the UK though, the good, the bad and the indifferent. Some good fighters do have videos of their fights on YouTube though, sometimes it's the only way we can watch them.

 

[WC_lun]

American ametuer MMA fighters do the same thing. It seems money in MMA is scarce world wide

 

[MJS]

And therin lies the problem: nothing can really be proven on an internet forum. One may be able to get answers to questions from others, and hopefully, those answers will be reasonably accurate.

Daniel

And this is why, when people (not necessarily anyone on this thread) start asking for the 'proof' or questioning whether or not something is legit or not, will work or not, etc, I usually suggest seeking out a school, so that you can see whatever it is that you're doubting, live and in person.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

This is not about what style is better.

It's just about how accurate or reliable youtube generally is in regards to depicting a decent representation of many styles.

ie. If you type' BJJ 'and know what videos or people to look for you, can get a decent representation of what it is all about.

If you type ' Kalaripayattu ' or ' Tahtib ' , what you find on youtube, might not be enough to establish too much of an opinion.

Unfortunately, when many non martial artists use youtube to find about about a martial art they stumble onto the vids that show one martial art vs another and take the result as gospel. I think if you already have a good knowledge of a martial art and have a lot of time on your hands you could probably sift through heaps of vids on youtube and find something useful. For me though, I would probably just aproach one of the 6th or 7th dans I train with and use them as a reference tool rather than youtube.