Taekwondo Doesn't work on someone skilled

[RTKDCMB]

There are 2 types of Tai Chi. There's one that is taught as a martial art for fighting

He probably thinks this is the Tai Chi used for fighting:

 

[RTKDCMB]

Sometimes they get along:

 

[RTKDCMB]

Well fighting being a secondary concern for a self defence martial art does explain why self defence martial artists don't fight very well.

What evidence do you sight to support this position?

 

[drop bear]

What evidence do you sight to support this position?

It is the use of logic.So the evidence is your statement that fighting is secondary to self defence Coupled with the statement that some martial artists don't fight very well.

Dosent seem that much of a stretch.

 

[RTKDCMB]

It is the use of logic.So the evidence is your statement that fighting is secondary to self defence Coupled with the statement that some martial artists don't fight very well.

Dosent seem that much of a stretch.

So none then.

 

[drop bear]

So none then.

I used your evidence.

How is that reasoning not sound?

 

[RTKDCMB]

I used your evidence.

How is that reasoning not sound?

First of all I did not say fighting is secondary to self defense, they are two different things. Fighting is not as concern for a self defense art at all. You defend yourself when you have to, you do not go out starting fights or getting into them if you can avoid them to prove you are better than anyone. Someone attacks you you defend yourself until you no longer have to. It's not that hard.

 

[Ruhaani]

I actually dont know what your talking about now..im lost hahah :-S

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk

 

[Ruhaani]

All I know is TMA are good self defense if you can understand the principles and use them simple

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk

 

[Ruhaani]

Ahhh I see I re read over the messages lol I understand where your coming from @ RTKDCMB

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk

 

[drop bear]

First of all I did not say fighting is secondary to self defense, they are two different things. Fighting is not as concern for a self defense art at all. You defend yourself when you have to, you do not go out starting fights or getting into them if you can avoid them to prove you are better than anyone. Someone attacks you you defend yourself until you no longer have to. It's not that hard.

So a self defence art treats fighting as a lesser skill? Is not its primary concern?

I don't think there are many starting fights oriented martial arts. But there are defiantly arts that treat fighting as its primary focus. It would stand to reason that they would be better at fighting.

So is tkd focused on fighting or self defence?

 

[RTKDCMB]

So is tkd focused on fighting or self defence?

You should probably get there is a difference between the two first.

 

[drop bear]

You should probably get there is a difference between the two first.

If there is a difference and self defence is not fighting then fighting is not as comprehensively covered in a self defence oriented martial art as it is in a fighting martial art.

Is that not reasonable?

 

[Earl Weiss]

If there is a difference and self defence is not fighting then fighting is not as comprehensively covered in a self defence oriented martial art as it is in a fighting martial art.

Is that not reasonable?

As with many things if 2 people cannot agree on how terms are defined a meaningful discussion is impossible. "Fighting" typically (but not literally) gives the impression of 2 people willing to engage in a mutual exchange. SD on the other hand typicaly involves one person attacking another who has not agreed to such an exchange and only enters into such out of neccessity. SD can and should typically if possible rely on Nike Jitsu / Run Fu.. SD primarily involves "Defense" against an attack which can include pre emption, avoidance, as well as "Defense" and counter attack.

There are places like RMCAT which only deal with SD, and it's founder readily and repeatedly states that he does not teach MA.

 

[Ruhaani]

Yeah you guys both are looking at a word "fighting" in 2 different ways so I agree with both self defence is fighting and looking to attack is fighting yin an yang

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Fighting and self-defense are not the same, but they do have areas of overlap. Some of the attributes and skills that are useful for one may also be useful in the other, although not always. Self-defense may sometimes involve fighting, but the tactical goals will usually be different from those in a consensual fight.

In fact, "fighting" and "self-defense" both cover a wide variety of situations. The skills and tactics which are appropriate in one fight scenario may not be helpful (and may be downright disadvantageous) in another. Same with self-defense.

Rather than saying "my art is for fighting" or "my art is for self-defense", it may be more useful to say something like "my training is optimized for fighting/self-protection in Scenario A, but certain skills and attributes that I'm building will be useful in Scenarios B, C, D, and E. My skills could also be useful in Scenarios F and G, but the tactics I've developed for Scenario A will get me in trouble, so I have to be prepared to recognize those situations and adapt my reactions accordingly. Scenarios H, I, and J are beyond the scope of what I've prepared for and I have no relevant expertise there."

 

[Ruhaani]

Nicely put@ tony dismukes

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk

 

[Ruhaani]

Good analogy about scenarios and how strategic think is important where its attacking or defending and what techniques could work and what may not

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk

 

[drop bear]

As with many things if 2 people cannot agree on how terms are defined a meaningful discussion is impossible. "Fighting" typically (but not literally) gives the impression of 2 people willing to engage in a mutual exchange. SD on the other hand typicaly involves one person attacking another who has not agreed to such an exchange and only enters into such out of neccessity. SD can and should typically if possible rely on Nike Jitsu / Run Fu.. SD primarily involves "Defense" against an attack which can include pre emption, avoidance, as well as "Defense" and counter attack.

There are places like RMCAT which only deal with SD, and it's founder readily and repeatedly states that he does not teach MA.

Yeah but here it doesn't matter. If the martial art in question believes self defence is not fighting and focuses on self defence their fighting is going to suffer.

So it is not about whether I subscribe to the idea.(which I don't)

 

[drop bear]

Fighting and self-defense are not the same, but they do have areas of overlap. Some of the attributes and skills that are useful for one may also be useful in the other, although not always. Self-defense may sometimes involve fighting, but the tactical goals will usually be different from those in a consensual fight.

In fact, "fighting" and "self-defense" both cover a wide variety of situations. The skills and tactics which are appropriate in one fight scenario may not be helpful (and may be downright disadvantageous) in another. Same with self-defense.

Rather than saying "my art is for fighting" or "my art is for self-defense", it may be more useful to say something like "my training is optimized for fighting/self-protection in Scenario A, but certain skills and attributes that I'm building will be useful in Scenarios B, C, D, and E. My skills could also be useful in Scenarios F and G, but the tactics I've developed for Scenario A will get me in trouble, so I have to be prepared to recognize those situations and adapt my reactions accordingly. Scenarios H, I, and J are beyond the scope of what I've prepared for and I have no relevant expertise there."

Yeah. Situational defence. I did try that idea a while back. But did not get much traction. So just as a way to make yourself safer. You may need to learn first aid or how to fall or swim or a whole bunch of life skills.

Like what they do in the army.