Curious

[fringe_dweller]

I got to thinking the other day (I know, an unusual exercise for me) and I started wondering about why people talk about who would win a fight between one style and the other. I mean isn't the goal of MA self defence? Why would two martial artists nuke it out apart from a sporting event?
So why is it that people spend so much time saying their style is better or bagging out other people's styles?

Respectfully,

 

[cali_tkdbruin]

That's a question I've pondered in my mind plenty of times. Personally I've never found a need to bash someone else's Art. In fact I get curious and I like to learn as much about the differences between their Art and mine. Every style martial art has it's strengths and its weaknesses. So when some ignorant pinhead says that their Art is the best of the best, end all MA then I just think they're being a Knucklehead.
Sorry, did I just go off on a minor rant? Excuse me...

 

[Zepp]

Doesn't sound like a rant to me- just a valid point.

I can tell you for sure who will lose a fight between two different styles. The guy who underestimates his opponent because of what art they train in.

2 martial artists have absolutely no business at all fighting outside of a ring or sanctioned match. Any that do should be kicked out of whatever organization they belong to and put on a blacklist so that legitimate instructors won't teach them.

 

[Jill666]

Originally posted by Zepp
Doesn't sound like a rant to me- just a valid point.

I can tell you for sure who will lose a fight between two different styles. The guy who underestimates his opponent because of what art they train in.

There you go, making sense. We'll have none of that here!
:rofl:

But seriously I have to say (for the gagillianth time) that if you keep your mind open and learn why other martial arts move differently, you can gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing.

:soapbox:

 

[jdmills]

All Martial Arts have strengths and weaknesses. People that dwell on the strengths of a particular art and overlook the weaknesses are wearing blinders and those that want to argue how this art is inherently inferior are overlooking the strengths. Any legitimate martial art can be extremely effective in certain situations and any legitimate martial art is almost always extremely effective when employed by a skilled practitioner against a less skilled opponent.

There are lots of factors that decide the outcome of a fight and only one of them is the style employed. Natural ability, skill level, size, strength, speed, endurance, sheer luck, and lots of other factors play a part in the final outcome and to say that the outcome determines the better style is over simplistic.

 

[ace]

Originally posted by fringe_dweller
I got to thinking the other day (I know, an unusual exercise for me) and I started wondering about why people talk about who would win a fight between one style and the other. I mean isn't the goal of MA self defence? Why would two martial artists nuke it out apart from a sporting event?
So why is it that people spend so much time saying their style is better or bagging out other people's styles?

Respectfully,

Which Came 1st The Fight & The Fighter ot The Art & those Who Try to employ it??????

 

[ace]

Originally posted by Jill666
There you go, making sense. We'll have none of that here!
:rofl:

But seriously I have to say (for the gagillianth time) that if you keep your mind open and learn why other martial arts move differently, you can gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing.

:soapbox:

:cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

 

[Disco]

That's not such a far fetched scenario. There's lots of bad guys out there that have studied and trained in the arts. Even street fighters, although not formally trained, pick up techniques from watching other's. At least, attempt to have some understanding of the different styles that are out there. You can never tell when you just may have to square off against one of the bad boys of karate.:asian:

 

[Shinzu]

the whole purpose of the martial arts is self defense. one is not better than the other. the techniques may vary but the goal remains the same.

 

[jdmills]

Great philosophy Shinzu, and of course it is true. However, the goal of the martial arts is not always the goal of those who study them. I have seen this from personal experience. There are even some extremely formidable black belts who are little more than trained street fighters. Some of these guys (every one that I have ever seen has been male) have no qualms of fighting on the street and starting trouble and then "defending themselves". In a bar, it is not difficult to get someone to swing at you and then these trained fighters feel free to anihilate the poor drunk bastard that wasn't smart enough to back down.

Believe me, it happens and more frequently than most people would like to admit.

 

[fist of fury]

Originally posted by fringe_dweller
I got to thinking the other day (I know, an unusual exercise for me) and I started wondering about why people talk about who would win a fight between one style and the other. I mean isn't the goal of MA self defence? Why would two martial artists nuke it out apart from a sporting event?
So why is it that people spend so much time saying their style is better or bagging out other people's styles?

Respectfully,

If you notice it's mostly men that do it and it all boils down to the age old argument of ...My d!ck is bigger than yours.

 

[Master of Blades]

Originally posted by fist of fury
If you notice it's mostly men that do it and it all boils down to the age old argument of ...My d!ck is bigger than yours.

Not technically true......cuz I would win all the time in that case :lol:

Oh come on......like you didnt see that one coming

 

[fist of fury]

Originally posted by Master of Blades
Not technically true......cuz I would win all the time in that case :lol:

Oh come on......like you didnt see that one coming

You must've read that wrong I didn't say who was the bigger d**khead cause in that case you would win.

Sorry but you set yourself up for that one.

 

[A.R.K.]

2 martial artists have absolutely no business at all fighting outside of a ring or sanctioned match. Any that do should be kicked out of whatever organization they belong to and put on a blacklist so that legitimate instructors won't teach them.

If I may, I'd like to take that a step further. Two martial artists/warriors etc have no business fighting anywhere, including the ring!

I don't teach many children, and by children I mean teenagers. But of the few I teach, just like the adults I tell them day one...what I teach you is for DEFENSE ONLY. This is non-negotable. In fact it's the first two rules of our school;

Rule # 1 - What is learned is for defense only!

Rule # 2 - See rule # 1.

Therefore I find it highly hypocritical to teach them this then enroll them in the local tournaments. And for what? A trophy, a ribbon, a prize? Yeah, some can make an arguement that it refines their skills. Ok, do it in training not for recognition and a $5 trophy. Same for adults. I don't put down those that do, but I don't personally condone it.

The only exception for offensive use would be in-the-line-of-duty situations where it is necessary.

I think there would be a lot more respectful practioners who aren't concerned with trivial stuff. Just my opinion.

:asian:

 

[Zepp]

Originally posted by Mya Ryu Jitsu
If I may, I'd like to take that a step further. Two martial artists/warriors etc have no business fighting anywhere, including the ring!

I don't teach many children, and by children I mean teenagers. But of the few I teach, just like the adults I tell them day one...what I teach you is for DEFENSE ONLY.

I understand that opinon, but I can't agree with it.

For one thing, sport-fighting is fun, and training in the martial arts are supposed to be fun, as well as serious at the right times. You didn't become an instructor because you constantly feared for your life, or your students' lives did you?

For another thing, competition is part of human nature. Competition is very often what drives individuals to improve their abilities and indirectly improve many aspects of one's mental health. I think that completey removing competition from the martial arts could only be detrimental.

 

[A.R.K.]

Zepp,

I understand your position and I'm not saying your wrong. Just that my position differs a bit. I see competition being detrimental in the light of giving someone a false sense of security when it comes to a real world altercation.

I see it as conflicting to say 'defense only'....except for fun or a trophy. I'm not looking down on it or those that enjoy it. I just disagree politely with it.

I've never been in a competition, but I have been in real fights. It was never fun to hurt someone, only necessary in order to go home. Perhaps this has colored my ideas on this topic.

Again, to each his own. Thats why there are so many flavors of ice cream

 

[Shinzu]

Originally posted by jdmills
Great philosophy Shinzu, and of course it is true. However, the goal of the martial arts is not always the goal of those who study them. I have seen this from personal experience. There are even some extremely formidable black belts who are little more than trained street fighters. Some of these guys (every one that I have ever seen has been male) have no qualms of fighting on the street and starting trouble and then "defending themselves". In a bar, it is not difficult to get someone to swing at you and then these trained fighters feel free to anihilate the poor drunk bastard that wasn't smart enough to back down.

Believe me, it happens and more frequently than most people would like to admit.

i agree with you. unfortunately everyone does not believe in the same code as we do. these people have no business starting fights, let alone training in the first place. too bad we can't pick out the bad apples before they ripen on the branch. that's why it is so important to portrait yourself as a quality and true martial artist. we are far and few, but we are here.. and we will be the last standing.

 

[michaeledward]

I don't know if this is true, or even where I heard it. But I like the way it sounds. I am not a very good story teller, so I'm sure some could tell this story much better, but you'll get the basic point (pun intended) of it.

Two 'Masters' of sword techniques ended up in a fight situation. The both drew their blades and got into a 'Ready' position, and then, neither moved. After several minutes, the fight was ended in a draw.

What I took away from this story, is that the Masters realize that to make an offensive move is to create a weakness, to open an undefendable opening.

I would suppose that this is true of every system, knowing this, the arguement about which system would win in a fight becomes a discussion of which system has the most exploitable weaknesses, and which system is best positioned to exploit those weaknesses.

My $0.02 -- Mike

 

[jdmills]

I think that "which system would win" cannot ever be proven since the system is only as good as the person employing it. A loss does not prove that the losing system is worse, only that the person using the losing system was unable to defeat the person using the winning system on that day.

Benny Urquidez was 58-0 full contact when he retired from the ring, does that mean his system was the best?

 

[Zepp]

Originally posted by Mya Ryu Jitsu
Zepp,

I understand your position and I'm not saying your wrong. Just that my position differs a bit. I see competition being detrimental in the light of giving someone a false sense of security when it comes to a real world altercation.

As I said, I understand your position too. I just felt that the other side of the coin should be stated here. :asian: