Training half of martial arts bugs me.

[drop bear]

This is the logical fallacy you keep falling into. This is essentially argument from ignorance. It would be different if you said you choose not to believe what is said without evidence, but your stance here (and just as explicitly in other threads) is that if the evidence isn't provided (in the way you demand it), then the claim is false. "False" is not the same as "unproved".

Then you just turn loose your bias to do the rest.

Yeah but you then treat unproven as probably correct but you can't be bothered proving it rather than a load of unfounded BS.

No evidence to support basically means it doesn't exist.

This is where we should sit when we look at your multiple unfounded allegations. And I ask you to prove it and you say it is too hard but you still walk away thinking you haven't done the wrong thing by throwing false accusations at people.

 

[drop bear]

Yeah, there's that generalization again. See, I gave you a specific example of eye gouges being taught NOT as a gap-filler, but as "you could also do this here". But you believe what you believe, and that's how it's gonna stay.

This is what you said

"It seems to me you sometimes jump to the conclusion that something that shows up in a system or curriculum must get equal time with other stuff. My primary instructor did teach eye gouges. I'll bet I spent an entire 2-3 hours of my training time over 15 years with him on eye gouges. They'd come up a couple of times a year, and we'd cover a couple of points on them, then move on to the next thing.

If eye gouges are receving the same time commitment as the jab, I agree - they're a waste of time. But if they are simply visited at times to discuss things like when they do and don't work, pros/cons vs. punches, etc., then that can be time well spent."

Now you can tell if someone is doing eye gouges rather than the defence because they won't do the defence.

I just went through pages explaining this.

So instead of doing anything at all that stops a single leg they just jam a finger in an eye and job done.

This was the specific example I was discussing.

I explained that eye gouges are not in themselves worthless but are a good example of the sort of half martial arts training that bugs me.

So what point are you trying to make that in any way then relates to this discussion?

That some people don't spend lots of time training eye gouges?

Ok. Nice bit of information there.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

But mentioning the fence made me think of this. Doing a fence but not understanding distancing or angles does not work very well.

I lovely know that one. Its instictive to put your hands out to stop somone from getting in and some of the instinctive barriers if not properly utilizied are quite shoddy. Even more so if you dont realise you are meant to KO the person if they test the barrier. Which would be the half training you described, you forget you need at least the mindset to put somones head into concrete if it warrants it. (among other things, but the mindset and ability to actually follow through seems the most important)

I also dont like the usage of "train" in refrence to skills you are born with the knowledge to do. Like you dont "train" walking. You learn how to do it through repeated attempts once your muslces are strong enough. You learn how to use said muslces and to maintain balance to walk. Same with most of your instricts, you learn (or should learn) how to use them. Probbly not the thread for it, but it sort of links into the fence as being a so-so instictive device. Most people probably dont have to use it therefor they forget it/dont know how to utilize it to its full potetional. Plus its my generic ramblings on specfic word usage.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah but you then treat unproven as probably correct but you can't be bothered proving it rather than a load of unfounded BS.

No evidence to support basically means it doesn't exist.

This is where we should sit when we look at your multiple unfounded allegations. And I ask you to prove it and you say it is too hard but you still walk away thinking you haven't done the wrong thing by throwing false accusations at people.

And what allegations are those you are referring to?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This is what you said

"It seems to me you sometimes jump to the conclusion that something that shows up in a system or curriculum must get equal time with other stuff. My primary instructor did teach eye gouges. I'll bet I spent an entire 2-3 hours of my training time over 15 years with him on eye gouges. They'd come up a couple of times a year, and we'd cover a couple of points on them, then move on to the next thing.

If eye gouges are receving the same time commitment as the jab, I agree - they're a waste of time. But if they are simply visited at times to discuss things like when they do and don't work, pros/cons vs. punches, etc., then that can be time well spent."

Now you can tell if someone is doing eye gouges rather than the defence because they won't do the defence.

I just went through pages explaining this.

So instead of doing anything at all that stops a single leg they just jam a finger in an eye and job done.

This was the specific example I was discussing.

I explained that eye gouges are not in themselves worthless but are a good example of the sort of half martial arts training that bugs me.

So what point are you trying to make that in any way then relates to this discussion?

That some people don't spend lots of time training eye gouges?

Ok. Nice bit of information there.

So, your reply to me wasn’t a reply to my comment? Got it.

 

[drop bear]

And what allegations are those you are referring to?

I don't have to do your homework for you.

 

[drop bear]

So, your reply to me wasn’t a reply to my comment? Got it.

Your comment was close enough to the topic to make me think you were contributing but vague enough to move the goal posts any time you wanted.

So I thought you were making a real point and I addressed that rather than the weasel comments you actually made.

I mean you could show me an example of how these eye gouges are not gap fillers. But you won't of course because you train faith based. And dont feel anyone needs to be shown evidence of anything.

And it makes it easier to just say you are the real deal when all those other guys are getting it wrong.

 

[drop bear]

An hour long video of Rokus and roy dean discussing how half a martial art basically doesn't work.

 

[drop bear]

So, your reply to me wasn’t a reply to my comment? Got it.

And the thing is your response isn't that uncommon. Quite often when you see martial art dominated by whatever. The first response from that art is he doesn't know the real secrets of. or. Is not training the true version.

And of course is then unwilling to ever show that true version.

Because faith based martial arts is never obligated to validate a claim.

Which of course leaves those areas of martial arts open to charlatans. And why they get so much criticism.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't have to do your homework for you.

So, you can’t even come up with the allegations. As I expected.

This is a weak attempt, even for you.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Your comment was close enough to the topic to make me think you were contributing but vague enough to move the goal posts any time you wanted.

So I thought you were making a real point and I addressed that rather than the weasel comments you actually made.

I mean you could show me an example of how these eye gouges are not gap fillers. But you won't of course because you train faith based. And dont feel anyone needs to be shown evidence of anything.

And it makes it easier to just say you are the real deal when all those other guys are getting it wrong.

As usual, you accuse me of moving goalposts, even as you do so, yourself. You made a specific claim, which I countered with my own experience.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And the thing is your response isn't that uncommon. Quite often when you see martial art dominated by whatever. The first response from that art is he doesn't know the real secrets of. or. Is not training the true version.

And of course is then unwilling to ever show that true version.

Because faith based martial arts is never obligated to validate a claim.

Which of course leaves those areas of martial arts open to charlatans. And why they get so much criticism.

Except nothing I said was at all along the lines of someone not knowing the secrets. Quite the opposite, actually. But you read it as you wanted it to read. Now, rather than doing what you think you are doing (trying to educate and correct logic, which I actually appreciate when you manage to actually approach it), your bias has you spending your energy correcting things I haven’t even said.

A waste of effort you fall into rather a lot with me these days.

 

[drop bear]

Except nothing I said was at all along the lines of someone not knowing the secrets. Quite the opposite, actually. But you read it as you wanted it to read. Now, rather than doing what you think you are doing (trying to educate and correct logic, which I actually appreciate when you manage to actually approach it), your bias has you spending your energy correcting things I haven’t even said.

A waste of effort you fall into rather a lot with me these days.

You did. You said you train the real eyegouge when everyone else's trains the unrealistic.

It is a very common easy excuse to throw out there with faith based systems s there is no way to know one way or another why you do.

 

[drop bear]

As usual, you accuse me of moving goalposts, even as you do so, yourself. You made a specific claim, which I countered with my own experience.

A claim you just denied.

 

[drop bear]

So, you can’t even come up with the allegations. As I expected.

This is a weak attempt, even for you.

You believe what you want regardless of the facts.

You are not my student it is not my duty to show evidence.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You did. You said you train the real eyegouge when everyone else's trains the unrealistic.

It is a very common easy excuse to throw out there with faith based systems s there is no way to know one way or another why you do.

Actually, what I said was that we don't train it much, and I don't see the value in spending more time on it. (Which, by the way, would make ME the one not knowing the "secrets", which is entirely opposite your prior assertion.) Oddly, you're arguing with me as I agreed with you that training the eye gouge as a separate thing doesn't seem to have much value.

All that is beside the point though, because I was responding to your assertion that eye gouges are taught as a diversion when someone doesn't know a defense. I was simply showing you an example of eye gouges being taught in addition to another defense. But you missed that entirely (as well as my agreement with you), because you can't even read my words anymore with assigning them a meaning not within the words.

Now, thinking about it, I can see where me saying there's not much sense training beyond "here's where you could also apply an eye gouge" is saying others aren't training the real thing. But then, how is it in any way different from your frequent assertions that people are training stuff that doesn't work?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You believe what you want regardless of the facts.

You are not my student it is not my duty to show evidence.

Interestingly, you seem to think when I make a claim (even a casual one), I should show proof. And when you make a claim about me, you also think it's my duty to disprove that.

You need never show proof. I always must. Interesting approach. Yet you claim no bias?

As for what I believe, you've yet to make a statement in the last few months that accurately reflected my beliefs. You think I believe things regardless of the facts, because you assume you know what I believe, regardless of my statements. You do the same thing with claims about my trainnig (even going so far as to claim I've said things you can't even hint at).

You've entirely lost your ability to spar in debates. I never really cared for you doing that, anyway, because you were more concerned with winning a point than with contributing or learning, but at least you were debating with some logic then.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Reading through these, I really think all of us training together for a month would change how we approach each other, and the debates themselves. I know that's entirely unrealistic, but it would help so much.

 

[drop bear]

Interestingly, you seem to think when I make a claim (even a casual one), I should show proof. And when you make a claim about me, you also think it's my duty to disprove that.

You need never show proof. I always must. Interesting approach. Yet you claim no bias?

I honestly can't think of a single time you showed proof of anything though. So I don't think it is something you can suddenly start complaining about me not having to do it.

I am operating to your standard.

And surprisingly your standard suddenly becomes not good enough.

In other words your logic is so flawed even you don't accept it.

 

[drop bear]

Reading through these, I really think all of us training together for a month would change how we approach each other, and the debates themselves. I know that's entirely unrealistic, but it would help so much.

I think there would be too much ego for that to happen.

I mean we can't even see a video of people's training for fear of something or other.

But if anyone wants to we hold an open mat precisely for that reason so feel free to drop in. (Obviously after the coronavirus thing)

But yeah. I don't care about looking stupid or getting handled by people. It is part of the development.