So what's a better "test" for martial arts other than MMA?

[Ironbear24]

If you tried to grab a persons arm mid shank you would get gutted as well.

I mean it is almost impossible without a knife. But we just flail around hoping to get lucky.

By the way you never mentioned if you fought one knife guy more times than a hundred knife guys.

If you do it wrong yes, think of it as a block when someone is punching you, are you able to stop it? I know you have before, it is not that much different with a knife aside from the next step which is control of the limb.

Like everything in martial arts it must be practiced many times before you can actually pull it off under stress.

Prove it.

We already have, Juany showed you a GJJ video of how to disarm an attacker with a knife, then I showed you a Judo video of how to disarm an attacker with a knife, both do the same thing but with a different method. 1, they stop the knife mid attack by jamming the attack, and 2. They control the limb with a joint lock/ throw. 3. The knife is no longer with the attacker.

You claimed that these arts did not have much answers for this yet they do and we have showed you this. There is your proof, whether or not you will accept it as proof is up to you.

 

[drop bear]

At what point did I say full-contact wasn't used? I mentioned some options that are useful. I never said other stuff wasn't.

You're trying really hard, again, to make my argument something other than what was said.

So you agree with the above point.

 

[drop bear]

We already have, Juany showed you a GJJ video of how to disarm an attacker with a knife, then I showed you a Judo video of how to disarm an attacker with a knife, both do the same thing but with a different method. 1, they stop the knife mid attack by jamming the attack, and 2. They control the limb with a joint lock/ throw. 3. The knife is no longer with the attacker.

You claimed that these arts did not have much answers for this yet they do and we have showed you this. There is your proof, whether or not you will accept it as proof is up to you.

So a demo is proof.

 

[Ironbear24]

So a demo is proof.

The principals remain the same, person with knife attacks you in a fashion that many people would attack you in. You respond to it, you want to test in real life by all means put on a ku klux klan robe and run through east L.A.


It also serves as proof because you claimed they did not have answers to it, well this shows you they obviously do and train for it.

 

[drop bear]

The principals remain the same, person with knife attacks you in a fashion that many people would attack you in. You respond to it, you want to test in real life by all means put on a ku klux klan robe and run through east L.A.

Ok. so can determine effectiveness of self defence by adopting tried and tested principles.

We can't determine effectiveness by what may or may not work in a small sample of street violence.

 

[Ironbear24]

We can't determine effectiveness by what may or may not work in a small sample of street violence.

Jiu Jitsu comes from a time where people attacked you with swords and knives, they were created to disarm and break their attackers while being unarmed. Judo is basically just more modernized Jiu Jitsu and has many of these same principals.

So it is not one small sample of street violence, more like a couple thousand years of street violence that has stood the test of time.

 

[drop bear]

Jiu Jitsu comes from a time where people attacked you with swords and knives, they were created to disarm and break their attackers while being unarmed. Judo is basically just more modernized Jiu Jitsu and has many of these same principals.

So it is not one small sample of street violence, more like a couple thousand years of street violence that has stood the test of time.

So the art has to be a couple of thousand years old.

Sorry Akido. You are out.

 

[Ironbear24]

way to miss the point yet again, it is not about the age at all, it is about how long it has been applied and been working. Aikido also comes from an older named Daito Ryu Jiu Jitsu if you want to play that game.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So you agree with the above point.

What point. What I saw was an assertion that I don't use full contact.


Gerry Seymour
Shojin-Ryu, Nihon Goshin Aikido

 

[drop bear]

What point. What I saw was an assertion that I don't use full contact.


Gerry Seymour
Shojin-Ryu, Nihon Goshin Aikido

Ok Do you use full contact as a method of testing?

And my point was.

So if you were not actually training full contact. you probably wont go well in a full contact fight. like self defence.

Even if you got lucky a few times.

 

[Juany118]

Ok. so can determine effectiveness of self defence by adopting tried and tested principles.

We can't determine effectiveness by what may or may not work in a small sample of street violence.

No, what we are saying is that you need what they sometimes call "representative sample size." So, to use the title of this thread, from years of what we now see as MMA (it is practically it's own art at this point imo, even if different fighters lean more towards striking or grappling as an individual) we can say that MMA works in the context of that kind of conflict.

It goes even further because MMA is also a great example of how fighting can evolve a great deal over the years. It started rather basic, this striking TMA vs that, grappler v grappler, grappler v striker etc. Initially, skill being equal, grapplers usually beat strikers then fighters started showing uo that were pretty skilled at both, the grapplers started to lose, grappling still often ended a fight more often than a KO but the "pure" or almost lure grappler didn't. Then they introduced gloves and made other rules changes and striking started to become the main way fights were ended because powerful blows to the head started to rise dramatically. Does MMA Make You Stupid? Impact, Concussions and Brain Damage in Mixed Martial Arts - Grapplearts you still need grappling but striking has become "bigger".

So here we see how the rules of a competition have effected a MA's evolution by years of testing. Similarly the "rules" (such as the existence of weapons) of the battle field contributed to the evolution of other Martial arts over years (in this case centuries) of testing. One street encounter does equate to negating years of testing that say otherwise.

 

[Juany118]

Oh. well thats easy.

I will point out non blade specific wrestling has been used to train soldiers for the battlefield. And has been used against weapons effectively. Heck the techniques were born on the battlefield and evolved in very different cultures all over the world.

And that military and law enforcement have validated the techniques I am saying work.

So please name a martial art, that we actually know the original techniques for (example modern Pankration is an modern approximation) and the fighting force trained in it, that lacked specific techniques to address a weapon wielder when unarmed.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ok Do you use full contact as a method of testing?

And my point was.

So if you were not actually training full contact. you probably wont go well in a full contact fight. like self defence.

Even if you got lucky a few times.

On a limited basis, yes.

 

[drop bear]

No, what we are saying is that you need what they sometimes call "representative sample size." So, to use the title of this thread, from years of what we now see as MMA (it is practically it's own art at this point imo, even if different fighters lean more towards striking or grappling as an individual) we can say that MMA works in the context of that kind of conflict.

and by context you mean of course sport,self defence,police,security and war.

The sorts of activities MMA trained people engage in.

It goes even further because MMA is also a great example of how fighting can evolve a great deal over the years. It started rather basic, this striking TMA vs that, grappler v grappler, grappler v striker etc. Initially, skill being equal, grapplers usually beat strikers then fighters started showing uo that were pretty skilled at both, the grapplers started to lose, grappling still often ended a fight more often than a KO but the "pure" or almost lure grappler didn't. Then they introduced gloves and made other rules changes and striking started to become the main way fights were ended because powerful blows to the head started to rise dramatically. Does MMA Make You Stupid? Impact, Concussions and Brain Damage in Mixed Martial Arts - Grapplearts you still need grappling but striking has become "bigger".

Debatable.

So here we see how the rules of a competition have effected a MA's evolution by years of testing. Similarly the "rules" (such as the existence of weapons) of the battle field contributed to the evolution of other Martial arts over years (in this case centuries) of testing. One street encounter does equate to negating years of testing that say otherwise.

I am still talking thousands of years of wrestling.

 

[drop bear]

So please name a martial art, that we actually know the original techniques for (example modern Pankration is an modern approximation) and the fighting force trained in it, that lacked specific techniques to address a weapon wielder when unarmed.

Capoeira.

Capoeira, Runaway Slaves & The Dutch-Portuguese War

Combat glima. Who were of course vikings.

Traditional african wrestling.

You have to understand most people addressed weapons by having their own weapons.

 

[Juany118]

Capoeira.

Capoeira, Runaway Slaves & The Dutch-Portuguese War

Well first that is largely a striking art, not wrestling. Second...

So they do similar techniques to those that I was discussing.

 

[drop bear]

Well first that is largely a striking art, not wrestling. Second...

So they do similar techniques to those that I was discussing.

If they attack in that manner one stab and then stop. then fine grab the arm.

 

[Ironbear24]

So please name a martial art, that we actually know the original techniques for (example modern Pankration is an modern approximation) and the fighting force trained in it, that lacked specific techniques to address a weapon wielder when unarmed.

He is just going in circles honestly, Many police officers use both Jiu Jitsu and Judo techniques.

 

[Steve]

Ironically to king someone in Australia means this.

Also they have nazi,s in new Zealand. I mean you have to have some stones to walk up to one of these guys and inform them you are the master race.

So, is a king hit like a sucker punch?

 

[Juany118]

If they attack in that manner one stab and then stop. then fine grab the arm.

Oh since you added the videos via an edit, I didn't see them when I first responded so
1. Caporeia is out since it is a primary striking art and uses the knife defense everyone else has said works better.
2. Your videos are non-sequiturs. Neither of them actually show any defensive techniques for fighting unarmed against an armed attacker, its all unarmed vs unarmed. That said...

GLÍMA - The Martial Art of the Vikings by Tyr Neilsen

So Glima is out. An interesting thing to note btw, if you didn't know, is that Glima has multiple styles. One is a "combat" version which is basically just a Scandinavian style of HEMA (it also includes weapon use along with the grappling) and the rest are various forms of "folk wrestling" which are only intended to be used against another unarmed wrestler.

Also the Traditional African wrestling we see today that you noted is formally recognized as folk wrestling not combat wrestling, often used for either rights of passage, an exercise (not training regime) for warriors or bouts of honor. As an example we have records of a version from the Canary islands that was documented by the Spanish in the early 15th century. It had referees even then that the Spanish referred to as "hombres de honor." So at least from what we can prove, that's out to

So thus far every art you have noted specifically (Glima, HEMA, Judo, Caporeia) either uses the techniques others note as superior OR has no documented proof of it being designed specifically for use on the battlefield and thus potentially opposing an armed combatants as they were, essentially, "friendly", though yes aggressive, sporting competitions (Traditional African wrestling as it has is known today and documented back to 1400.).