How effective is your martial art?

[chrismay101]

Hello everyone reading this thread!

At the moment I am studying Taekwondo and I love it. Do I think it is an effective martial art maybe no! I think it is a very short sighted martial art that is very dynamic in that watching it in action is very impressive.
but dealing with an attacker who come in close I would be worried.

but the opposite could be said of a grappling martial arts may be not as dynamic and impessive to watch but very effective close up but at distance will strugle.

So What is the most effective martial art?
if im wrong about the above tell me!

If you do decide to post can you explain your art and thoughts.

 

[Sukerkin]

Hi Chrismay

I think that a read of this thread http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47286 might reward your attention.

A browse through the fora directed by the search feature might aid you too - this is not exactly an un-discussed topic .

Welcome aboard :tup:.

 

[bluekey88]

Y'know...I currently study TKD as well. In the past I've done karate, Wing chun, grappling/wrestling...my first art was Aikido. In other words, I've been around a fair bit.

I'm sure if you cruise these and other MA forums and look through threads like this you'll hear the phrase "It's not the art bu the artist" or something along those lines. That's really your answer.

Put more simply, your art is as effective as you want to make it. It's a simple as that. I recall an anecdote of a particualr high ranking Aikido sensei (not sure who off hand) when told by a lower ranking student that Aikdo wasn't effective and didn't work. The sensei smiled and said "YOUR Aikido doesn't work...mine works just fine."

My training is like that. I work to make what I do as effective for me as possible. That's all I can do. Try not to get too hung up on what's the "best" art and just train...if what you;re doing doesn't work for you...go find something that does. In the end though, the critical factor is you and nothing else.

Peace,
Erik

 

[MJS]

Hello everyone reading this thread!

At the moment I am studying Taekwondo and I love it. Do I think it is an effective martial art maybe no! I think it is a very short sighted martial art that is very dynamic in that watching it in action is very impressive.
but dealing with an attacker who come in close I would be worried.

but the opposite could be said of a grappling martial arts may be not as dynamic and impessive to watch but very effective close up but at distance will strugle.

So What is the most effective martial art?
if im wrong about the above tell me!

If you do decide to post can you explain your art and thoughts.

IMHO, all arts have something to offer. Take an art like TKD. There are some fantastic kickers in TKD. If I can talk to some TKDers about how to improve my kicking technique and flexability, I just got something out of it.

Another thing to take into consideration is how each person trains their art. Bluekey88 made a great point with this:

Put more simply, your art is as effective as you want to make it. It's a simple as that. I recall an anecdote of a particualr high ranking Aikido sensei (not sure who off hand) when told by a lower ranking student that Aikdo wasn't effective and didn't work. The sensei smiled and said "YOUR Aikido doesn't work...mine works just fine."

This pretty much sums up what I was going to say.

Mike

 

[Shotgun Buddha]

I once beat a grizzly bear to death with my Art. This was acomplished by pushing my recently purchased Statue of David over on top of pinning him to the ground. I then repeatedly beat it about the head with a few lesser Van Goghs, and one or two Monets, which I never really liked anyway. I think the blood stains were an improvement.
Overall Ive found Da Vinci's work to have little stopping power when trying bludgeon an opponent, while a Picasso tends to wind them more than anything else.
For real KO force, Im gonna have to go with a Zhou Dynasty Wine Jar, which although it smashes on impact, so do they.

 

[chrismay101]

Cheers Sukerkin for the heads up!

 

[Shaderon]

Like the others say it's down the the artist, but I'd also say it's down to the teacher in a smaller sense too.

I train in TKD also, but I can see plenty of real world applications to my style of TKD as my teacher teaches it and as we learn it. We are always asking questions (even the kids) like "What would you do if someone come up behind you and grabbed you or hit you?" and we get a sensible, well thought out answer often with a gentle demonstration (ouch). It doesn't say alot for the kids at our school (or perhaps it does) but they wanted to learn what to do if someone tried to grab their hands behind thier back as if getting arrested last night, they got shown how to get out of it, a take down and later us adults were shown a finishing strike to go with it all. Then the instructor told them the dangers of trying to escape from the police, which sunk in because the assistant instructor is a policeman. !!

 

[chrismay101]

MJS.

I think your right what I kind of ment was does the martial art that you ( the reader) practice have any limitation in your opinion?

 

[chrismay101]

Shaderon

what school do you train at in GTUK?

 

[MJS]

MJS.

I think your right what I kind of ment was does the martial art that you ( the reader) practice have any limitation in your opinion?

I've had similar discussions with other people who do Kenpo, like myself. During my example, keep the comment that bluekey made, in mind. There was a time when I would say that Kenpo didn't have any ground work. I was met with people saying, "Yes it does, you just need to know how to find it." Now, I have not met every Kenpoist in the world, so that comment may be very true. Are there ascpects in it? Sure. Are there weapon defenses against a club and knife? Sure. Have I worked some of the techniques from a horizontal position and found certain moves useful? Sure.

However, things have their limitations. I cross train in BJJ for my grappling and Arnis for my weapons. I look at it like this. There are many areas covered, but there are other arts, which focus the majority of their time to a given area. Ex: BJJ on the ground. What better way for me to really test my tackle defenses, but against someone who specializes in ground work.

Now, this is not to say that Kenpo is not effective. Its a very effective art. Perhaps though for myself, I felt it necessary to cross reference other arts. There are a ton of arts out there. I like to explore as much as I can. I'd rather have a tool in my box and not need it, than to need it and wish it was there.

Mike

 

[Tez3]

I doubt my art has any limitations at all but I have a great many!

 

[Shaderon]

Shaderon

what school do you train at in GTUK?

I train in two classes of GTUK Northwest, mine are in Cheshire, England, one of them is a beginners class mostly and the other is a more wide ranging more established class, both run by the same instructor. GTUK is a school in itself.

Where do you train?


And to answer your question, I don't know what my arts limitations are really, I have answered this question before with "floor work" but since then I've been an assistant for a Black Tag who was working out a few moves and in one of them he was throwing me to the floor and dealing with me there... so I'd have to say I don't know, but I owuld agree with Tez3 and MJS, most arts can be MADE effective in most situations, it's just that some are better than others in some situations, the main weakness of the art is the practitioner.

 

[chrismay101]

I train near stratford.

I train in ITF/UKTA - how does GTUK differ?
I was thinking of going to train in GTUK in stratford i think it run by a Mr Archer.

 

[Shaderon]

MISTER ARCHER!!!! He's the guy who's grading me next week! *gulp*

Mister Archer is two steps below God to me!

I don't know how UKTA differs from GTUK but the instructor I train with is very into self defence and real world stuff, you might get others who aren't as into it, but they also, depending on yor rank, they might be just giving you what you need to now right now. I'll PM you and we can have a proper chat about GTUK in private rather than hijacking the original theme of the thread. I know it's your thread, but you have asked others a question and this is diversifying a bit.

 

[bluemtn]

I agree with what other posters have said earlier. It's not the art, it's the person, and at times the instruction. I've seen some instructors only focus on certain areas of an art, but not enough on others, and the same goes for the students.

 

[still learning]

Hello, True it is the person who makes the art. Mind set or mentality strong and determine is very important here (survival).

Keep in mind REAL FIGHTING will be fast,furious,anything goes,unexpected, and alone many times.....

Most of us do not train for the adrenlines/fear factors/heart racing...situtions...in a dark place..who knows what the other person has on him (knife,gun, etc). Plus many times the attacker will be unknown.

Also most of us will be trying to descalate the situtions...while the attacker maybe getting ready to strike.

Are you prepare for the first blow? .....Have you train against a big unknown? ....in a close back room with the lights dim? all by yourself?

Most of the martial arts can be effective! ....BUT in a REAL sitution...it is the PERSON who can handle the ADRENLINE/FEAR factor the most...and physcial prepare in his art....could determine the outcome...

Also many times the attacker most likely weight his thoughts on his chances of succeeding (knows he has the advantage most times or will not strike). BUT strike first has AN advantage.

Are you prepare for this? A real fight? .............Aloha

 

[LawDog]

The only limitions are the practitioners.

 

[kidswarrior]

Hello everyone reading this thread!

At the moment I am studying Taekwondo and I love it. Do I think it is an effective martial art maybe no! I think it is a very short sighted martial art that is very dynamic in that watching it in action is very impressive.
but dealing with an attacker who come in close I would be worried.

but the opposite could be said of a grappling martial arts may be not as dynamic and impessive to watch but very effective close up but at distance will strugle.

So What is the most effective martial art?
if im wrong about the above tell me!

If you do decide to post can you explain your art and thoughts.

I know very little about TKD, but have read enough of Exile's posts on the down and dirty applications to know it's not just an Olympic sport (although that's a good thing, too). After all, it is a cousin of Hapkido and Tang Soo Do, no? You might check with Exile by PM and ask for some references to past threads, good books or sites, etc.

Also, zDom and matt.m I believe have cross trained their Hapkido with TKD. They're extremely knowledgeable and experienced.

 

[TraditionalTKD]

Originally Tae Kwon Do (especially Chung Do Kwan) was used by the Korean police and military to train the troops. So obviously it had to be effective. The newer version maybe not so much. Winning medals is not the same thing as defending your country.
Not only that, but my Instructor practiced Tae Kwon Do back in the old days when TKD was used in streetfighting and he had to use it himself. So it apparently had some effectiveness. The fact that he lived to tell us means it obviously helped him.

 

[tellner]

Once again, the calls of "The styles don't have any limitations, only the student." It's the right thing to say in a certain sense. It's also wrong, and almost everyone who says it out of pious respect and good fellowship knows it. It can also get people pretty seriously dead if they take it to heart.

Even if every martial art contained solutions to every possible situation there are only so many instructional hours in a week. So things won't get taught or learned. And frankly, no system has everything. Royce Gracie threw kicks in his UFC appearances. In all humble respect of his grappling skills, his striking didn't suck. If it sucked it would have been good for something. Kendo has no empty hand work to speak of. Pure strikers are laughably bad on the ground (no I don't count Fukien Dog Boxing as pure striking), and most aren't much better in the clinch.

It doesn't matter how hard you practice BJJ. It won't make you a decent puncher. You can have the best Thai boxing instructor in the world. Unless he's also got Krabi Krabong you will never be good with a spear. All the Chung Do Kwan in the world will not help you the tiniest bit if you're fighting ankle deep in slippery mud. And the world's top MMA coaches will be completely lost when it comes to many-on-many fighting.

These are undeniable limitations on the styles. The student who says "It's not the Art. It's my limitations. I just have to try harder," or worse, the teacher who sells the student that particular line is engaging in delusion and madness.

There are systems that simply work for one person which will never work for another. A blind man can be a fantastic wrestler. I recall a case about ten years ago where a totally blind from birth Judo player in Philly killed an armed mugger. No matter how hard he trains he will never be a sniper. I have a long torso and arms, short legs and a particular congenital deformity of the hips. Capoeira Regional and classical Wing Chun are forever beyond my grasp. But I do better at wrestling than I should based on my (pathetic) skills. My wife is a hell of a martial artist. She would need to triple her weight, add half a foot to her height and put on a lot of muscle to be anything but a hollow joke at Sumo.

Nothing, MMA, not Silat, not Krav Maga, not JKDC, not even Bo Fung Do (which comes as close as anything I've seen) has everything or will be effective in all circumstances. Every single system and style out there has undeniable strengths and glaring weaknesses. Anyone who has been around the block a couple times and maintains otherwise is, I wish there were some kind way of saying it, telling a lie. It may be for the best of reasons. It may be from the highest motives. But it's still not true. And if they've ever had a reality check bounce they'll know it's not true. If it were true martial arts would be completely unchanged from back in the days of the Olduvai Gorge. There would have been no need for development, collaboration or evolution. We'd fight the same way all over the world because everything was already there.

We don't. We pick ourselves up or pick up the remains our buddy who wasn't so lucky, say "That didn't work," and come up with something new to patch the holes in what we were doing before. The phalanx beats the heroic warrior. The legion beats the phalanx. The Mongols beat everyone who doesn't adopt their tactics. Everyone lives and learns or they don't live long. Pious mouthings about how their style isn't really limited or deficient are abandoned when they lead to burned crops, dead men, babies' heads bashed against the ruined buildings and lamenting women being led off as chained slaves. "Men fight men. Styles don't fight styles," as one superb teacher says. It's true. It's also true that martial arts is a tool. Some tools are just better than others for different jobs. No matter how good you are with the most expensive drillpress it will never be a television set.