style or workout?

does the effectiveness of an art depend morely on style or workout?

  • style

  • workout

  • not sure


Results are only viewable after voting.
H

hand2handCombat

Guest
many different styles perform different workouts.

do u think the effectiveness is in the style or workout. for example, karate with MT workout
 
I need a 'none of the above' choice.

It has long been my belief that the effectiveness of any art/style/system is dependent on the individual. What is important is whether a person can make an art/style/system effective. For example, I've seen Goju practitioners who are brutally effective fighters, and I know of a few who can't fight their way out of wet paper sacks.

I think this holds true for many things in life.

Cthulhu
 
My sentiments exactly Cthulhu!I have trained with practioners of MANY different arts, it is always the individual- not the art, that determines the fighting prowess of the trainee.(S.P?)
At this point I truly beleive that a great fighter trained in style X, would also be a great fighter if versed in style Y.
:EG:
 
ofcourse there are many differrent dependecies. like experience, quick think, etc, etc. but i just want to know which one is more important
 
Are you asking which aspect of training is most important?
From the title of your thread it seemed to me that you were trying to determine if MA style was more influential than training intensity.After your last post I'm not sure which of these is the basis of your question.sorry, I move fast but somtimes think slowly!
:EG:
 
I would have to go with style. I feel that what style of martial arts you are training in determines not only your technique applications in form, but also function in actual combat situations. Example; karateka practice basically kata and try to analyze it's proper useage in actual combat situations. Now the different styles of karate stress different combat applications of even the same kata whether they are basic , intermediate or advanced. Therefore the same kata can have different combat applications depending on what style is executing the bunkai application in the actual confrontation. Now Kung Fu training is another turn of the screw in that it emphasizes not only the internal and external styles and their respective applications; but the forms also have names in which they train in. Chi Kung or Qi Gong is relatively different for every kung fu style. The "White Crane Spreads It's Wing's Form" is different in Tai Chi Ch"uan, than in Chi Kung even though they have the same name. Names like circle walking in baguazhang and 36 secret songs of fighting application theory make baguazhang very different from tai chi ch'uan theory, yet they both share the grand ultimate taiji relation of yin and yang birth. Also in baguazhang you learn about the body's vital points in the pre-heaven points in the fist and actually strike these points in the post-heaven fist. Some train with, concrete blocks on their arms, while others train with bricks in their hands; some hit a sand paper makiwara and others hit in hot sand and stones. Still others train with iron ring's on their wrists and others hit a steel makiwara etc,. Therefore from my experience, style does determine what type of training and practitioner will develop from the respective martial system's foundation's roots.
Sincerely, In Humility; Chiduce!
 
"do u think the effectiveness is in the style or workout" - oringinal post by hand2handcombat Techincal theory and functional application are all well and good, Chiduce. But the point of this thread seems to be asking whether the hard work of the trainee is more important to the ultimate success (what ever that may be in each individuals mind) of the practitioner. Or if there is a stlye so amazing, so dominant and superior to all others, that simply by training in this stlye one would achieve their goals - even if maximum effort where not put forth.
:EG:
 
Originally posted by fissure

"do u think the effectiveness is in the style or workout" - oringinal post by hand2handcombat Techincal theory and functional application are all well and good, Chiduce. But the point of this thread seems to be asking whether the hard work of the trainee is more important to the ultimate success (what ever that may be in each individuals mind) of the practitioner. Or if there is a stlye so amazing, so dominant and superior to all others, that simply by training in this stlye one would achieve their goals - even if maximum effort where not put forth.
:EG:
Here, i do not think that your interpretation of the thread's meaning is valid within the question. Please do not take this statement as a punch, stab, etc below the belt. It is only intended to prove the point of validity of there being a better style or workout! Physical work is just what it is. This does not matter what workout or what type of workout it is. Yet, physical workout with martial knowledge, which develops martial skills, which in turn develops martial combat applications is another story. It is these 3 elements which turn the workout into physical applications. The weight lifter develops strength, power, and muscle mass, but not at the rate of the body builder. Both can kick and punch, throw and choke or strangle. But they both cannot apply this knowledge as skills to execute against a formidable street opponent. Even black belts lie in the streets every day defeated because of lack of the application of the prior 3 elements mentioned. Workout is not power, "Knowledge, in this case 'Martial Knowledge' Is Power"! It is well known within the martial arts community by both karateka, akidoka, jujutsuka, judoka, kungfuka and the like, that no style is superior in the martial arts. That is why there are so many styles to choose from. One can blend into their respective motion dynamic to create a personal fighting style which would best fit their needs in violent confrontation. Yet, even this personal style must have the prior 3 elements to be effective. This brings to mind the "workout" to which you are referring; say not including stretching, yet when kicking time comes in the confrontation, the stylist dislocates his/her knee joint trying to survive the violent attack! What if it does not include elbow training? The stylist attempts to break the attacker's clavicle and throws his/her shoulder out of joint in the process. So, there is no ultimate workout; just the basics and better knowledge of the basics combined with the elements of knowledge, skills and application. There are many effective styles and workouts, yet no ultimate or superior of each. I will leave this conversation with a quote from Soke William Durbin of Kiyojute Ryu Kempo Bugei on Kaiko- Keiko "The Secret Of Mastery"; 'Review & Practice': "Kaiko means Review and literally means 'to look back on' and it is this quality that makes the difference between a true Master of the martial arts and a person who plays at the martial arts". Keiko means Practice or learning to apply better the skills attained through the review of martial knowledge. " True Masters are those who spend a great deal of time working on the basics". Therefore, it is very safe to assume that all intermediate skills (and their respective levels), advanced skills and their application (effectiveness(of style thru workout)) are derived from the basics!
Sincerely, In Humility; Chiduce!
 
what woudl you consider the basics to be? I have seen this term thrown around alot but I don't realy understand what it describes.
 
Originally posted by sweeper

what woudl you consider the basics to be? I have seen this term thrown around alot but I don't realy understand what it describes.
The basics, being punching, kicking, throwing, blocking, striking, kata, forms etc,. Each will reveal a new way of execution within several given situations. I will use a kicking example; from the front kick comes the snapping toe, and heel kicks, the thrusting toe and heel kicks, the scooping toe and instep kicking, and the cresent & roundhouse kicking motions. Now lets add the left leg in a stepping motion away from an attempted left hand strike, combined with a left hand outside blocking motion by you to counterstrike with the right hand to the attacker's ribs. As the outside block is executed and contact is made, turn-in with the left stepping leg and while stepping forward with the right leg, use a high stepping motion. As the right leg steps into the attacker the foot is turned into an inverted side kick position (or backwards side kick, right heel facing inside of your left knee), and produces a high front thrusting stomp kick to the attacker's left knee just as the right hammer fist to his ribs/kidney area makes contact. Now this right leg can even slide off the knee to the rear position (or contour down the left leg to crush the left angle also, before sliding off) behind the attacker's left leg to set-up a right elbow to the neck, wing (foream opening) spreading throw over the right rear positioned leg. So, from the basic outside block combined with the left leg stepping away from the attack, rather than into the attack first helped position the body for a newer kicking motion which resulted as an inverted reverse side thrusting stomp kick, which in turn developed into a very reasonable basic throwing finish for the escape. This basic inverted kick is used typically as an abdominal front thrusting kick in tournament fighting. The street fighting adjustment is all in the defensive stepping body positioning.
Hope this helps!
Sincerely, in Humility;
Chiduce!
 
Chiduce, I'm sorry but I have to say this. I have never sean such long and rambling posts. Your last, in response to sweeper, is a case in point.
what woudl you consider the basics to be? I have seen this term thrown around alot but I don't realy understand what it describes
Your answer in a nut shell was
The basics, being punching, kicking, throwing, blocking, striking, kata, forms etc,.
But you then go on to expound in excruciating fashion upon every
miniscule varient of the front kick. The things you say about this are not wrong, but they are the simple progresion from the basic front kick that every art makes - snap kich, thrust kick, strick with toe, strick with the heel, stepping fron kick, ect.,ect.,ect.Can you possibly believe that martial artists need you to disspense this basic information to them in every reply and post you make?
To your 1st reply to me-
karateka practice basically kata and try to analyze it's proper useage in actual combat situations. Now the different styles of karate stress different combat applications of even the same kata whether they are basic , intermediate or advanced. Therefore the same kata can have different combat applications depending on what style is executing the bunkai application in the actual confrontation
Really wow! I'm sorry to sound condisending but this the most basic of concepts, yet with the tone of your posts it seams you think you are disspensing somekind of wissdom.
In your last post to me -
The weight lifter develops strength, power, and muscle mass, but not at the rate of the body builder
Are you kidding? One, a bodybuilder gains size faster than a weight lifter not strenght and power.If this were not so, them some BB would win gold in the olympics every four years.Can you really think there are BB's with the strenght of Vasilev, Hamond and the like? Two, who cares? I thought we were talking MA.
Lastly -
yet when kicking time comes in the confrontation, the stylist dislocates his/her knee joint trying to survive the violent attack! What if it does not include elbow training? The stylist attempts to break the attacker's clavicle and throws his/her shoulder out of joint in the process
And?
There are many effective styles and workouts, yet no ultimate or superior of each
You say stlye makes the fighter, yet read your own words above.If there is no superior stlye ( I agree!), them what seperates the average trainee from the cream of the crop? Could it be intensity, duration ,frequency and length of time spent practissing? I have no need of another page of your "Intro to MA 101" Please don't spend time going over the intricacies of " 36 kinds of elbow stricks" or some other equally mundane discourse.
 
man relax a little fissure : )

I assumed he meant bodybuilders gain size/strength/power faster than your average joe that goes to the gym every couple days but doesn't realy know what he's doing.

And I assumed what he meant about style being most important is diffrent styles train diffrent so style determins what you train and how you train it. (of course I could be wrong)

Actualy the long and rambling post kinda helpped, I actualy asked the wrong question (or rather an incomplete question) I guess it would be better to ask "what in MA isn't part of the basics?" I would assume from the post you would refer to the basics being root movements and the more advanced movements would be the variations? (front kick=basic snapping toe=more advanced ?)
 
fissure, you took up more page space in your attempt to discredit chiduce then he did. lighten up.

in my opinion style comes first in importance. physical prowess wanes with age, but technique can increase for ever. great example: taiji master. my old instructor, han was in his early 80's when i had the honor to learn from him. he weighs 90lbs. and he is as frail as they get, i was lucky when i could even get a hand on him, and when i did, i later wished that i hadn't. he could strike me with as much power as anyone i have ever known.
 
O.K., I went over board - I apologize. Hey it was 4a.m. and I had a bug up my a**. BUT , I can't stop!
taiji master. my old instructor, han was in his early 80's when i had the honor to learn from him. he weighs 90lbs. and he is as frail as they get, i was lucky when i could even get a hand on him, and when i did, i later wished that i hadn't. he could strike me with as much power as anyone i have ever known.
I still mantain that his life time of qulity trainig in his art produced his end result.If the system itself made him great , wouldn't it have made everyone who pursued it great? Shouldn't all exponents of Taiji (hope this is his art, I'm not familiar) have his skill? I'm not trying to argue here, but can you appreciate my point? :asian:
 
yes, i agree with you if we are approaching the two subjects of style vs. training as one, in effect a "system". the two are inseperable. however, my interpretation of this question is whether physical conditioning or technical expertise is the prevailing aspect to effective martial arts. practice is one thing, but hand2hand originally said "workout" which would be something else. i believe that conditioning (developing the body)is immensely important, second only to technique, which is developed through the mind first.
right or wrong?
 
Good! You express your interpretaton very clearly.
do u think the effectiveness is in the style or workout
I took "workout" to mean the effort or intensity of training in the particular style. I didn't consider that hand2hand would think that general "conditioning" could possibly be more important than learning correct form.:asian:
 
Originally posted by fissure

Chiduce, I'm sorry but I have to say this. I have never sean such long and rambling posts. Your last, in response to sweeper, is a case in point.

You say stlye makes the fighter, yet read your own words above.If there is no superior stlye ( I agree!), them what seperates the average trainee from the cream of the crop? Could it be intensity, duration ,frequency and length of time spent practissing? I have no need of another page of your "Intro to MA 101" Please don't spend time going over the intricacies of " 36 kinds of elbow stricks" or some other equally mundane discourse.
Fissure, who or whatever you are does not bother or concern me a bit. The comment that i made was to sweeper and not you! This was an A&B conservation. Now as far as you claiming my explaination to sweeper was suppose to be a course. This is how martial artists discuss specific's and not generalities! Your bias attitude of a post that has nothing to do with you tells me about yourself as a person with no understanding of self. Since you do not have a site to show your credentials and your understanding of even your own art. Please stay out of other peoples conversations which you have no knowledge of! If you get mad at this statement; you are right where you need to be!
Sincerely, In Humility;
Chiduce!
 
Several things Chiduce. 1: i beleive I already apologized before you made your last post. 2: your first post in this thread was a general statement of your thoughts, the next post you made quoted me and made a conclusion about my words. This being so how can you make the statemant that i am in someone elses conversation? 3: should anyone on this message board who doesn't have their own web site assume that , in your opinion, anything they have to offer is meaningless?
I have been "right where I need to be", long before finding this site.If you read this thread you will find that, until your second post where you make the satement that my interpritations are invalid, all of my posts mearly answered or asked questions.Perhaps I should not have taken your criticism personaly - however from reading you last post, I see you have the same flaw as I. How can I be "mad" at a statement made by -someone I don't know, who doen't know me and in all likelihood I will never have any more meanigfull interaction with than typed thoughts on the net.:)
 
hate to jump in the middle but you commented on the thred chiduce had posted in responce to a question I asked about one of his statements in your dialog with him.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top