To Win or Not to Lose?

[isshinryuronin]

To win, we need be clear of mind to execute sound MA principles, concepts and skills taught.

Many times, the victor is simply the one who made less mistakes. Maybe this was in Matsumura's mind when he said he tried not to lose. Not defeating yourself. Use sound technique and execute it well, don't screw up and things should turn out OK.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Many times, the victor is simply the one who made less mistakes.

A and B are fighting in a tournament. A has strong offense and B has strong defense. In 3 rounds of fight, A's attack was blocked/deflected by B's strong defense. In all 3 rounds, B didn't throw even 1 punch/kick. After 3 rounds, the score is 0-0, 0-0, 0-0.

If you don't attack, you won't make mistake. B was "not lose". But did B win?

 

[isshinryuronin]

A and B are fighting in a tournament. A has strong offense and B has strong defense. In 3 rounds of fight, A's attack was blocked/deflected by B's strong defense. In all 3 rounds, B didn't throw even 1 punch/kick. After 3 rounds, the score is 0-0, 0-0, 0-0.

A couple of ways to look at this. In one sense, since A's offense was ineffective and B's defense was quite effective, B could be said to have won. Alternatively, in ties/very close calls, the win usually goes to the offense as they showed more initiative. It's not much, but it's better than showing no spirit. I've noticed this happens more frequently in pee wee sparring divisions. Two seven-year-olds jumping around, circling each other with no contact for 2 minutes. Sometimes the best kiai screamer wins, that being the only observable criteria.

In real life, though, given enough offense without having to defend, eventually the aggressor will score a hit.

If you don't attack, you won't make mistake.

This reminds me of myself when I started out - shy, non-confident, worrying about leaving myself open during an attack. But I got hit anyway and eventually learned my lesson. Not attacking or at least countering is the mistake.

 

[marvin8]

What do you mean when you say, "I know kick/punch/lock/throw, but I have no technique"?

"No technique" to me mean a person who has never trained MA.

Even in striking art, you still need training time to develop your punch. Do you call a simple punch "technique"?

You can't apply a hip throw without going through hip throw training. If you have gone through hip throw training, you have developed hip throw technique, you cannot say that you have "no technique".

AI is helpful in these philosophical discussions. So, I will start with that. But, AI is not that helpful in telling one how to technically fight.

ChatGPT:
Bruce Lee’s famous quote — "I have no technique; my highest technique is to have no technique" — captures the essence of his martial philosophy, especially as it evolved into his personal art, Jeet Kune Do.

What it Means:​

This quote reflects the idea of ultimate adaptability. Bruce Lee believed that rigid systems and fixed techniques could limit a fighter. Instead, a martial artist should be fluid, like water — able to adapt instantly to the moment, the opponent, and the environment. Here's a breakdown:

• "No technique" doesn’t mean you’re untrained — it means you're not bound by any one style or method.
• He advocated for formlessness, drawing from Taoist philosophy — like “Be water, my friend.”
• By having "no technique," you are free to use whatever works, regardless of its origin — boxing, fencing, kung fu, jiu-jitsu, etc.

In Practice:​

In combat, having no technique means:

• You are not predictable.
• You can flow from one move or range to another seamlessly.
• You’re not confined to the “rules” or dogmas of one martial art.

Philosophical Core of Jeet Kune Do:​

“Absorb what is useful, discard what is useless, and add what is specifically your own.”
— Bruce Lee

That statement, along with “having no technique,” was Lee’s way of rejecting tradition for tradition’s sake. He urged martial artists to think critically, test everything, and keep only what’s effective for the individual.

​

 

[isshinryuronin]

AI is helpful in these philosophical discussions. So, I will start with that. But, AI is not that helpful in telling one how to technically fight.

ChatGPT:
Bruce Lee’s famous quote — "I have no technique; my highest technique is to have no technique" — captures the essence of his martial philosophy, especially as it evolved into his personal art, Jeet Kune Do.

What it Means:​

This quote reflects the idea of ultimate adaptability. Bruce Lee believed that rigid systems and fixed techniques could limit a fighter. Instead, a martial artist should be fluid, like water — able to adapt instantly to the moment, the opponent, and the environment. Here's a breakdown:

• "No technique" doesn’t mean you’re untrained — it means you're not bound by any one style or method.
• He advocated for formlessness, drawing from Taoist philosophy — like “Be water, my friend.”
• By having "no technique," you are free to use whatever works, regardless of its origin — boxing, fencing, kung fu, jiu-jitsu, etc.

In Practice:​

In combat, having no technique means:

• You are not predictable.
• You can flow from one move or range to another seamlessly.
• You’re not confined to the “rules” or dogmas of one martial art.

Philosophical Core of Jeet Kune Do:​

That statement, along with “having no technique,” was Lee’s way of rejecting tradition for tradition’s sake. He urged martial artists to think critically, test everything, and keep only what’s effective for the individual.

​

I don't like the basic premise - it equates "technique" with the idea of a limited restrictive style. This article basically puts JKD into the MMA category. But even MMA uses technique, albeit drawn from a variety of styles. Punches, kicks, throws, submissions, etc. are all techniques as are fencing moves such as binding or beating the blade as a prep or the fleche attack. An MA technique is simply a move that accomplishes some combat purpose to be drilled and practiced. Claiming to have no technique is just a mysterious sounding marketing hook.

Lee rejected tradition for tradition's sake, which in a pragmatic art like MA, is normally a good idea. But some effective tradition may be tossed as well just because its application in real life combat is not properly understood. Many traditions have their roots in practicality - one needs to dig back into those roots to judge their relevance and true intent.

The article defines "having no technique" as unpredictability, flow and no restrictions on tools used. The first two are possible only because of technique. Technique (both in terms of the physical move as well as the skill employed) is what allows these qualities to be expressed. Restrictions are simply a function of one's training and what one knows.

Lee could have said, "I have no particular techniques" meaning he doesn't rely just on a few moves/skills. This would be a more accurate statement. But all this is off-topic of this thread.

 

[Same Trick]

Have some tea and a story, what makes aggressors flee and win you glory

The Samurai and the Tea Master - Storynory

 

[Prince_Alarming]

Lee could have said, "I have no particular techniques" meaning he doesn't rely just on a few moves/skills. This would be a more accurate statement. But all this is off-topic of this thread.

A very insightful post, but since when have we given a monkey's cuss about going off topic?

 

[Badhabits]

Having no technique I think just means letting go of specific techniques as examples of principles. In other words, the techniques you learn are themselves just varying examples of how to apply the same principles. You can learn 5 different ways to "break" an elbow. But all 5 of those are just different examples of how to overextend an elbow. Once you have learned this to where it's second nature, you're no longer limited to those 5 techniques as ways to break an elbow. You might not have been taught to pull an arm across your chest and just hit the elbow with your shoulder- but you know that'll accomplish the same thing as those 5 techniques. That's having no technique.

 

[HighKick]

In FMA with its initial emphasis on weapon training, if you can’t avoid, ya really want to win.

How do you win if you cannot avoid?