How hard is it to become proficient in weapons based martial arts compared to physical fighting ones?

D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
TL;Dr read for all the replies, but i would reccomend one, but youd probbly find a lot of places that do more than one may move you onto the next one pending how well you do, and previously stated some use similar in principles weapons back to back and may opt for the safer weapon first out of the two. Say a knife and a stick. A stick is safer than a knife, and some may start you off with a stick with full intention you will only use a knife once confident in the basics.

Its honestly quickr and better to get good at one thing if you focus on that one thing, its why people tend to break down training into compotent parts now and then and work on potetionally lacking compotent parts. Best example that comes to mind is say spending a week just doing drawing practise for pistols.

Edit: I would say in my view, you may become more competitive with weapons quicker just in general. The fact a knife is a fair bit more lethal [than fists] tends to lead to some disuasion about getting cut by it.

Addendum: I forgot the economic aspect to this, just know financies is a reason for some things as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Monkey Turned Wolf

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
10,916
Reaction score
4,894
Location
New York
TL;Dr read for all the replies, but i would reccomend one, but youd probbly find a lot of places that do more than one may move you onto the next one pending how well you do, and previously stated some use similar in principles weapons back to back and may opt for the safer weapon first out of the two. Say a knife and a stick. A stick is safer than a knife, and some may start you off with a stick with full intention you will only use a knife once confident in the basics.

Its honestly quickr and better to get good at one thing if you focus on that one thing, its why people tend to break down training into compotent parts now and then and work on potetionally lacking compotent parts. Best example that comes to mind is say spending a week just doing drawing practise for pistols.

Edit: I would say in my view, you may become more competitive with weapons quicker just in general. The fact a knife is a fair bit more lethal [than fists] tends to lead to some disuasion about getting cut by it.

Addendum: I forgot the economic aspect to this, just know financies is a reason for some things as well.
Do you have any experience with knives/sticks/pistols that you're drawing those recommendations from?
 
OP
F

Flyingknee

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jun 25, 2021
Messages
51
Reaction score
12
TL;Dr read for all the replies, but i would reccomend one, but youd probbly find a lot of places that do more than one may move you onto the next one pending how well you do, and previously stated some use similar in principles weapons back to back and may opt for the safer weapon first out of the two. Say a knife and a stick. A stick is safer than a knife, and some may start you off with a stick with full intention you will only use a knife once confident in the basics.

Its honestly quickr and better to get good at one thing if you focus on that one thing, its why people tend to break down training into compotent parts now and then and work on potetionally lacking compotent parts. Best example that comes to mind is say spending a week just doing drawing practise for pistols.

Edit: I would say in my view, you may become more competitive with weapons quicker just in general. The fact a knife is a fair bit more lethal [than fists] tends to lead to some disuasion about getting cut by it.

Addendum: I forgot the economic aspect to this, just know financies is a reason for some things as well.

Great answer (especially by the standards of this forum).
 
OP
F

Flyingknee

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jun 25, 2021
Messages
51
Reaction score
12
TL;Dr read for all the replies, but i would reccomend one, but youd probbly find a lot of places that do more than one may move you onto the next one pending how well you do, and previously stated some use similar in principles weapons back to back and may opt for the safer weapon first out of the two. Say a knife and a stick. A stick is safer than a knife, and some may start you off with a stick with full intention you will only use a knife once confident in the basics.

Its honestly quickr and better to get good at one thing if you focus on that one thing, its why people tend to break down training into compotent parts now and then and work on potetionally lacking compotent parts. Best example that comes to mind is say spending a week just doing drawing practise for pistols.

Edit: I would say in my view, you may become more competitive with weapons quicker just in general. The fact a knife is a fair bit more lethal [than fists] tends to lead to some disuasion about getting cut by it.

Addendum: I forgot the economic aspect to this, just know financies is a reason for some things as well.

And please ignore Monkey Turned Wolf...
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,733
Reaction score
9,655
Location
Hendersonville, NC
Great answer (especially by the standards of this forum).
Except that - based on his past discussions of his own experience - it's mostly based on internet research, rather than experience or review of actual studies of the topics involved. But you've previously made it clear you don't really care for knowledge unless it comes the way you want it to.
 
OP
F

Flyingknee

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jun 25, 2021
Messages
51
Reaction score
12
Except that - based on his past discussions of his own experience - it's mostly based on internet research, rather than experience or review of actual studies of the topics involved. But you've previously made it clear you don't really care for knowledge unless it comes the way you want it to.

Emphasis on what I wrote in brackets.
 

Stablades86

White Belt
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
14
Reaction score
5
And would you recommend training in one weapon at a time or in more and how many?
It depends on the person. Nunchakus, Chinese broad swords, Katana, and Bo staff came easy to me. I'm self taught so I really pushed my self. Took as few as 4 months to be proficient. I'm working on kamas, 3 sectional, and rope dart currently.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,733
Reaction score
9,655
Location
Hendersonville, NC
It depends on the person. Nunchakus, Chinese broad swords, Katana, and Bo staff came easy to me. I'm self taught so I really pushed my self. Took as few as 4 months to be proficient. I'm working on kamas, 3 sectional, and rope dart currently.
What is your measure for proficiency? And what was your goal?
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
Do you have any experience with knives/sticks/pistols that you're drawing those recommendations from?
Define experience, because the lack of holster i have for any airsoft pistol really does hamper any ability to do drawing practise. (for any weapon actually, training knives dont tend to come with sheaths, institutional problem there, i know :p)

When/If we determine what experience here is, i can answer.



Except that - based on his past discussions of his own experience - it's mostly based on internet research, rather than experience or review of actual studies of the topics involved. But you've previously made it clear you don't really care for knowledge unless it comes the way you want it to.
Thats dishonest, its from internet research AND swinging broom handles in the back garden. :p


Hardly anyone cites any studies either, i dont think there are many actual studies into many martial arts concepts etc, and if there are, no ones linked me to them or they are behind a paywall or are more for the police/military so not really useful for civlian digestion.
Without going onto a 2 hour essay tangent rant on this. I dont think anyones actually given me studies, they always go "studies have shown" or "the science shows us" and doesnt actually cite the source. I have not seen any study or statistic on concussions or linked about concussions in boxing yet people still go "Studies have shown" x100 without linking the actual piece. Its poor science at best, fradulent at worst.

Some people may have but its so far and few between that i have probbly forgotten it.
 

Monkey Turned Wolf

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
10,916
Reaction score
4,894
Location
New York
Define experience, because the lack of holster i have for any airsoft pistol really does hamper any ability to do drawing practise. (for any weapon actually, training knives dont tend to come with sheaths, institutional problem there, i know :p)

When/If we determine what experience here is, i can answer.
Have you trained with knives, or sticks, with an actual instructor? What art have you trained in that involves weapons, and how long have you been training that art?

Have you been to a shooting range with a pistol that you have to draw, and taken classes on gun safety/how to shoot with an actual instructor? There are a lot of different types of classes in that regard, so just listing the ones that you've done should be fine.
 

Monkey Turned Wolf

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
10,916
Reaction score
4,894
Location
New York
Hardly anyone cites any studies either, i dont think there are many actual studies into many martial arts concepts etc, and if there are, no ones linked me to them or they are behind a paywall or are more for the police/military so not really useful for civlian digestion.
Without going onto a 2 hour essay tangent rant on this. I dont think anyones actually given me studies, they always go "studies have shown" or "the science shows us" and doesnt actually cite the source. I have not seen any study or statistic on concussions or linked about concussions in boxing yet people still go "Studies have shown" x100 without linking the actual piece. Its poor science at best, fradulent at worst.

Some people may have but its so far and few between that i have probbly forgotten it.
Here you go:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00913847.2020.1856631
and A Neurosurgeons Guide to Sports-related Head Injury

The relevant part of that second (not article, but source that cite's articles:
According to the Journal of Combative Sport, from January of 1960 to August of 2011, there were 488 boxing-related deaths. The journal attributes 66 percent of these deaths to head, brain or neck injuries; one was attributed to a skull fracture.
There are boxers with minimal involvement and those that are so severely affected that they require institutional care. There are some boxers with varying degrees of speech difficulty, stiffness, unsteadiness, memory loss, and inappropriate behavior. In several studies, 15-40 percent of ex-boxers have been found to have symptoms of chronic brain injury. Most of these boxers have mild symptoms. Recent studies have shown that most professional boxers (even those without symptoms) have some degree of brain damage.

The issue with actually quoting the sources to read though, which you might notice with the first one, or if you look at the links in the second-they cost money to read. So while one person may have an account that allows them to read it (my old school account still works, and provides a database), other people can't access those databases or read the articles in question. Which is fine if you're in a scholarly forum with other people that you know have access to the same databases/sites. But doesn't work as well in a forum like this.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,733
Reaction score
9,655
Location
Hendersonville, NC
Define experience, because the lack of holster i have for any airsoft pistol really does hamper any ability to do drawing practise. (for any weapon actually, training knives dont tend to come with sheaths, institutional problem there, i know :p)

When/If we determine what experience here is, i can answer.




Thats dishonest, its from internet research AND swinging broom handles in the back garden. :p


Hardly anyone cites any studies either, i dont think there are many actual studies into many martial arts concepts etc, and if there are, no ones linked me to them or they are behind a paywall or are more for the police/military so not really useful for civlian digestion.
Without going onto a 2 hour essay tangent rant on this. I dont think anyones actually given me studies, they always go "studies have shown" or "the science shows us" and doesnt actually cite the source. I have not seen any study or statistic on concussions or linked about concussions in boxing yet people still go "Studies have shown" x100 without linking the actual piece. Its poor science at best, fradulent at worst.

Some people may have but its so far and few between that i have probbly forgotten it.
There are plenty of studies about human skill learning, and that's the base of what we're talking about.
 
OP
F

Flyingknee

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jun 25, 2021
Messages
51
Reaction score
12
Define experience, because the lack of holster i have for any airsoft pistol really does hamper any ability to do drawing practise. (for any weapon actually, training knives dont tend to come with sheaths, institutional problem there, i know :p)

When/If we determine what experience here is, i can answer.




Thats dishonest, its from internet research AND swinging broom handles in the back garden. :p


Hardly anyone cites any studies either, i dont think there are many actual studies into many martial arts concepts etc, and if there are, no ones linked me to them or they are behind a paywall or are more for the police/military so not really useful for civlian digestion.
Without going onto a 2 hour essay tangent rant on this. I dont think anyones actually given me studies, they always go "studies have shown" or "the science shows us" and doesnt actually cite the source. I have not seen any study or statistic on concussions or linked about concussions in boxing yet people still go "Studies have shown" x100 without linking the actual piece. Its poor science at best, fradulent at worst.

Some people may have but its so far and few between that i have probbly forgotten it.

Just ignore the trolls in this thread.
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
Have you trained with knives, or sticks, with an actual instructor? What art have you trained in that involves weapons, and how long have you been training that art?

Have you been to a shooting range with a pistol that you have to draw, and taken classes on gun safety/how to shoot with an actual instructor? There are a lot of different types of classes in that regard, so just listing the ones that you've done should be fine.
I wouldnt call that "do i have any experience" thats "do i have any offical instruction", in which case, no for weapons (cant find it anyway) and no for pistols (cant find it anyway)

But, i have practised with stick and knife, and i have spordically done shooting when avalible with legal firearms for my country. I have done force on force for neither, but some "arts" done inclide force on force training or nomially do it. And the bulk of tactical shooting instruction is not force on force as far as i can tell. I dont think anyones going to argue that a knife is more lethal than a fist, if they wernt there wouldnt be two seperate crimes to if you stabbed somone comapared to punching. (GBH and ABH/Assaualt respectively where i am)

the statement of instruction brings me to the final point, not all instruction is equal, and several "arts" dont do force on force, and dont do training methods others do and vice versa. Would me seeking offical isntruction in a "art" validate or invalidate anything i have written more or less? You are effectively doing the same thing, you are just training somone for the privilage to be told how to bash somones head in with a stick. (in other words, their hints and tricks) And what explitly would it validate or invalidate? I made no statemnt on a specfic "art", so i am not coming from the base of knowledge anyone in said "art" would have. Id only be able to comment on said "art" if i did it, and qualfiications would only relate to that. I made a general statement more on general information i have found scanning articles etc and doing things on my own.

Hopefulyl that got the point across, i forgot how to combine it at points.
 

Monkey Turned Wolf

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
10,916
Reaction score
4,894
Location
New York
I wouldnt call that "do i have any experience" thats "do i have any offical instruction", in which case, no for weapons (cant find it anyway) and no for pistols (cant find it anyway)

But, i have practised with stick and knife, and i have spordically done shooting when avalible with legal firearms for my country. I have done force on force for neither, but some "arts" done inclide force on force training or nomially do it. And the bulk of tactical shooting instruction is not force on force as far as i can tell. I dont think anyones going to argue that a knife is more lethal than a fist, if they wernt there wouldnt be two seperate crimes to if you stabbed somone comapared to punching. (GBH and ABH/Assaualt respectively where i am)

the statement of instruction brings me to the final point, not all instruction is equal, and several "arts" dont do force on force, and dont do training methods others do and vice versa. Would me seeking offical isntruction in a "art" validate or invalidate anything i have written more or less? You are effectively doing the same thing, you are just training somone for the privilage to be told how to bash somones head in with a stick. (in other words, their hints and tricks) And what explitly would it validate or invalidate? I made no statemnt on a specfic "art", so i am not coming from the base of knowledge anyone in said "art" would have. Id only be able to comment on said "art" if i did it, and qualfiications would only relate to that. I made a general statement more on general information i have found scanning articles etc and doing things on my own.

Hopefulyl that got the point across, i forgot how to combine it at points.
Ok cool, so no actual experience, and not even any pressure testing. Just wasn't sure if that had changed.
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
There are plenty of studies about human skill learning, and that's the base of what we're talking about.
The issue was the citation and linking to them and the consistency in doing so. Not directly related to this thread, i dont know if any sources were linked or not, nor have i read the entire thing but its besides my general point. I have seen plenty of "studies have shown" with no actual citation to a reliable source if any source.

(and i am getting around to replying to monkies post on that)
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
Ok cool, so no actual experience, and not even any pressure testing. Just wasn't sure if that had changed.
No, i have experience[Per definition], what i dont have is offical paid for instruction.

Definition(s) of expereince from dictionaries i use:

[uncountable] the knowledge and skill that you have gained through doing something for a period of time; the process of gaining this

(the process of getting) knowledge or skill from doing, seeing, or feeling things:

I will not persue semantics any further.



The issue with actually quoting the sources to read though, which you might notice with the first one, or if you look at the links in the second-they cost money to read. So while one person may have an account that allows them to read it (my old school account still works, and provides a database), other people can't access those databases or read the articles in question. Which is fine if you're in a scholarly forum with other people that you know have access to the same databases/sites. But doesn't work as well in a forum like this.
No real rebuttal, i agree with the point. I know the issues of sourcing and finding them, but those issues existing doesnt mean its not proper to cite sources. Ok that doesnt sound right in my head, but what ever i dont want to spend anymore time on this.
 
Top