The issue sighT people try and reverse engineer ma, they start off with how it is, then try and find a logical reason why it is that way, and either just jump to conclusions or just make something up,,,, very few places are muddy all year round and don't have other not muddy area s close by,,, designing a ma that's only effective in mud, would be just silly, but yet someone has apparently come to that conclusion and then put it in a book and people then believe it.. There may actually be no logical reason for why something is as it is , other than someone has that preferenceMaybe i do take it too far. I might have put too much emphasis on terrain but i was citing examples from the book. Also i got one wrong, it was farmland, where they had thin singular paths which got muddy hence the need for them to be linear so they didnt slip over and they had no way to flank etc, it was more the combination of elements than one thing.
Some details are overlooked which can result in harm of yourself. You are after all being taught how to fight in your environment not anyone else's. Point examples, kicking when its muddy puts your balance at risk, or maybe you don't have shoes with a good grip for mud if you have shoes at all? So you will adjust to not kick often in a muddy environment. And one for cold weather, insulated clothing provides padding and restricted movement, which means you will get used to having some protection and fighting people with some protection and the same restrictions as yourself. a weapon seems fitting for this condition. One for hot weather, you don't want move as much to prevent sweating and overheating so you will probably want to rely on weapons more and conservative movements, in a desert environment sand can be hard to fight on if you are dismounted so kicks would be restricted and fighting while mounted on a horse of camel will probably fit.
Please tell me if i missed the point, i have a habit of that.
Excuse the language thing, it was a rule i was told but it doesn't mean their arent exceptions and it was more directed at traditional Japanese styles anyway. I have also done minor research but what i can do is limited.
that's for certain, no one is infallible.
back onto the book a killing art, should i get the new edition or old? I dont know the differences between the two and if its significant. (cant edit my old post)