What do you call an art that integrates striking and grappling?

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
19,229
Reaction score
4,742
Location
Covington, WA
In my opinion, they are definitely useful against trained opponents. You are trained, they are trained. It comes down to who is better at what they do than the other guy. It might be you or it might be the other guy and it might depend on the day of the week and what mood you happen to be in. But I fundamentally disagree with the notion that traditional martial arts were meant to be effective against an untrained opponent only. I do not buy it.

Now, there are top-level competitors who train more and train harder and may be in prime physical condition, against whom someone who does not train at that same level is unlikely to prevail. Of course that is true. But it boils down to who is better at what they do. I cannot fathom why the fact that a thug has some training suddenly makes him so much better than his intended victim who also has some training.

I think the prevailing belief here is that a "thug" is someone who has likely been in a fight or two (or more) and so has some actual experience applying anything they have learned. In contrast, an intended victim who has some training, but has never been in a fight, will just need to hope for the best. This is where I wish we had the data to look into it, as my theory is there would be no statistical difference between untrained and trained in a compliant TMA style training model with regards to crime.

Unless you have in mind someone who routinely applies their training. I would agree with that, but somehow, I don't think that's what you have in mind.

Of course modern violence follows this pattern too. Traditional fighting methods, highly effective a few generations ago, remain so today if they are trained appropriately.

I see this as being probably the same now as it was some generations ago. Violence continues on. Much of what worked then, still works just as well today. The caveat that I make is simply that a karate day-care class for toddlers isnt the training needed to be effective. Training needs to be carried out on an adult level with a real understanding of how to use it, and I suspect that is often not done in many schools today. But that is not a failure of the system, rather it is a failure of the teachers and the folks practicing them.

Hm. See above. I agree with your high level, philosophical statement here. But I would guess that you and I have very different things in mind when it comes to what type of training constitutes "adult level with a real understanding of how to use it."
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
20,972
Reaction score
5,837
I think the prevailing belief here is that a "thug" is someone who has likely been in a fight or two (or more) and so has some actual experience applying anything they have learned. In contrast, an intended victim who has some training, but has never been in a fight, will just need to hope for the best. This is where I wish we had the data to look into it, as my theory is there would be no statistical difference between untrained and trained in a compliant TMA style training model with regards to crime.

Unless you have in mind someone who routinely applies their training. I would agree with that, but somehow, I don't think that's what you have in mind.



Hm. See above. I agree with your high level, philosophical statement here. But I would guess that you and I have very different things in mind when it comes to what type of training constitutes "adult level with a real understanding of how to use it."

So this would be my definition of a thug and their level of training.


So what you would probably face from some drunken rando.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
27,057
Reaction score
8,390
Location
Hendersonville, NC
So this would be my definition of a thug and their level of training.


So what you would probably face from some drunken rando.
With a bit less fitness (and maybe strength?), and less coordination, both because of being drunk and because they're likely not as athletic.

Otherwise, yes. That level of aggression and overwhelm, and for at least a significant portion of them, some experience using it.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
20,972
Reaction score
5,837
With a bit less fitness (and maybe strength?), and less coordination, both because of being drunk and because they're likely not as athletic.

Otherwise, yes. That level of aggression and overwhelm, and for at least a significant portion of them, some experience using it.

Kind of. That is the most popular sport in my area.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
2,100
Location
Southeast U.S.
So this would be my definition of a thug and their level of training.


So what you would probably face from some drunken rando.
Probably being the key word. I have met some guys that grew up fighting who could really swat.
Thug in general use is a rather broad term so using it as a defining term could be easily misunderstood.
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
19,229
Reaction score
4,742
Location
Covington, WA
So this would be my definition of a thug and their level of training.


So what you would probably face from some drunken rando.

Probably being the key word. I have met some guys that grew up fighting who could really swat.
Thug in general use is a rather broad term so using it as a defining term could be easily misunderstood.
A friendly warning, I would exercise some caution using the term "thug" in certain parts of the USA. Sure, it can be used generally, to refer to someone who is thuggish. But there are a lot of folks who will interpret it with a racial undertone. I know some folks will dismiss this as PC, but this is intended as a practical warning... if you call someone a thug around the wrong people, it's like calling the wrong person "kid" or "boy." You may find yourself using your self defense skills.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
2,100
Location
Southeast U.S.
A friendly warning, I would exercise some caution using the term "thug" in certain parts of the USA. Sure, it can be used generally, to refer to someone who is thuggish. But there are a lot of folks who will interpret it with a racial undertone. I know some folks will dismiss this as PC, but this is intended as a practical warning... if you call someone a thug around the wrong people, it's like calling the wrong person "kid" or "boy." You may find yourself using your self defense skills.
Many, many people (wonder who) need to get over such things. In the south all bets are off on what someone may call you. So you are either the kind of person who is offended be everything or the person who is big enough to laugh off anything.
That said, 'thug' is on the lower end of the flattering scale:
A friendly warning, I would exercise some caution using the term "thug" in certain parts of the USA. Sure, it can be used generally, to refer to someone who is thuggish. But there are a lot of folks who will interpret it with a racial undertone. I know some folks will dismiss this as PC, but this is intended as a practical warning... if you call someone a thug around the wrong people, it's like calling the wrong person "kid" or "boy." You may find yourself using your self defense skills.
Please, please, please, not the racial thing again. It has been so overused it is sickening. 'Thug' has nothing to do with color. In the USA, none; Period. See the 2nd definition reference. It could be argued that , in the pats, color had something to do with it. But again, not at all in the racial reference you made. Quit poking the bear.

Merrian-Webster says:

thug​

noun
1.) a violent or brutish criminal or bully
2.) a member of a group of murderous robbers in India's past whose activities were suppressed in the early nineteenth century

As usual, I have no idea where you get your diatribe but it is completely off base.
In the south you better be ready to get called all manner of names. You are either the kind of person who is offended by everything (sound familiar) or the kind of person who laughs it off and is offended by nothing.
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
19,229
Reaction score
4,742
Location
Covington, WA
Many, many people (wonder who) need to get over such things. In the south all bets are off on what someone may call you. So you are either the kind of person who is offended be everything or the person who is big enough to laugh off anything.
That said, 'thug' is on the lower end of the flattering scale:

Please, please, please, not the racial thing again. It has been so overused it is sickening. 'Thug' has nothing to do with color. In the USA, none; Period. See the 2nd definition reference. It could be argued that , in the pats, color had something to do with it. But again, not at all in the racial reference you made. Quit poking the bear.

Merrian-Webster says:

thug​

noun
1.) a violent or brutish criminal or bully
2.) a member of a group of murderous robbers in India's past whose activities were suppressed in the early nineteenth century

As usual, I have no idea where you get your diatribe but it is completely off base.
In the south you better be ready to get called all manner of names. You are either the kind of person who is offended by everything (sound familiar) or the kind of person who laughs it off and is offended by nothing.
To be clear, it's black folks in the South who could be reacting poorly to the terms. My impression is that southern white dudes are a little too used to telling southern black dudes that they shouldn't be offended by the things the white dudes say. But I'm sure if we just ignore it, it will go away. :)

The salient point is, if you say thug (or boy or kid) to the wrong person, you will find out what they think of it.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
2,100
Location
Southeast U.S.
To be clear, it's black folks in the South who could be reacting poorly to the terms. My impression is that southern white dudes are a little too used to telling southern black dudes that they shouldn't be offended by the things the white dudes say. But I'm sure if we just ignore it, it will go away. :)

The salient point is, if you say thug (or boy or kid) to the wrong person, you will find out what they think of it.
I had no idea you were such an expert on the south. Regale me with how you became so wise.
As someone who has lived here my whole life I cannot tell you how far off base you are.

The funny thing is most black and white folk have been over this for sooo long. It is Too many people like you who choose to keep trying to stir up something that no longer exists. It is some kind of phobia?
Sad and hugely misinforming for impressionable minds. Dude, get out of the 60's.

I have black adults, adopted black kids and mixed kids in my family. So what? They treat and are treated just like everyone else. They get and give crap when it is deserved. And believe me when I say we cut no slack.

Say the wrong thing to anyone from anywhere and you will find out what they think of it. You truly do not get that?

Saying boy or kid here in the south is about as common as saying sir or ma'am. Just weird that you feel these words are some kind of taboo.
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
19,229
Reaction score
4,742
Location
Covington, WA
I had no idea you were such an expert on the south. Regale me with how you became so wise.
As someone who has lived here my whole life I cannot tell you how far off base you are.

The funny thing is most black and white folk have been over this for sooo long. It is Too many people like you who choose to keep trying to stir up something that no longer exists. It is some kind of phobia?
Sad and hugely misinforming for impressionable minds. Dude, get out of the 60's.

I have black adults, adopted black kids and mixed kids in my family. So what? They treat and are treated just like everyone else. They get and give crap when it is deserved. And believe me when I say we cut no slack.

Say the wrong thing to anyone from anywhere and you will find out what they think of it. You truly do not get that?

Saying boy or kid here in the south is about as common as saying sir or ma'am. Just weird that you feel these words are some kind of taboo.
Hey, you know. I was mistaken. I encourage you to use the term extensively. :D

Just, please... have someone record it. Go call some folks you don't know, who aren't your relatives, a thug. Call them boy or kid. Just, please, post the video. I would really get a kick out of seeing it.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
27,057
Reaction score
8,390
Location
Hendersonville, NC
Many, many people (wonder who) need to get over such things. In the south all bets are off on what someone may call you. So you are either the kind of person who is offended be everything or the person who is big enough to laugh off anything.
That said, 'thug' is on the lower end of the flattering scale:

Please, please, please, not the racial thing again. It has been so overused it is sickening. 'Thug' has nothing to do with color. In the USA, none; Period. See the 2nd definition reference. It could be argued that , in the pats, color had something to do with it. But again, not at all in the racial reference you made. Quit poking the bear.

Merrian-Webster says:

thug​

noun
1.) a violent or brutish criminal or bully
2.) a member of a group of murderous robbers in India's past whose activities were suppressed in the early nineteenth century

As usual, I have no idea where you get your diatribe but it is completely off base.
In the south you better be ready to get called all manner of names. You are either the kind of person who is offended by everything (sound familiar) or the kind of person who laughs it off and is offended by nothing.
Slang usage doesn't always make it to the dictionary. There are definitely areas where the term "thug life" refers to a specific subset of a specific racial group.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
27,057
Reaction score
8,390
Location
Hendersonville, NC
I had no idea you were such an expert on the south. Regale me with how you became so wise.
As someone who has lived here my whole life I cannot tell you how far off base you are.

The funny thing is most black and white folk have been over this for sooo long. It is Too many people like you who choose to keep trying to stir up something that no longer exists. It is some kind of phobia?
Sad and hugely misinforming for impressionable minds. Dude, get out of the 60's.

I have black adults, adopted black kids and mixed kids in my family. So what? They treat and are treated just like everyone else. They get and give crap when it is deserved. And believe me when I say we cut no slack.

Say the wrong thing to anyone from anywhere and you will find out what they think of it. You truly do not get that?

Saying boy or kid here in the south is about as common as saying sir or ma'am. Just weird that you feel these words are some kind of taboo.
I don't recall what area of the South you are in. Where I grew up in South Carolina (about 45 minutes from where I now live), they are definitely not over it.

Steve didn't actually start this making any kind of racial statement. He started out just pointing out that the term has - at least in some areas - a racial connotation. Which it does.
 

Latest Discussions

Top