When is it no longer a martial art?

[windwalker099114 144]

Would you consider airsoft/paintball, skeet shooting, or even hunting a martial art?

Many modern systems called “martial arts” no longer require practitioners to confront the real consequences of violence, even though the terminology remains. Historically, martial training was shaped by the lived possibility of lethal conflict, cultivating a particular psychological and physical condition. Much of the training was / is weapons based....

As training moves further from that reality, its martial character can become more symbolic than functional.
This raises a simple question: if training removes the possibility of death, does it remain martial?

One example comes from a teacher I trained under in Korea in the late 1970s teaching "Plum Flower Praying Mantis"

"Shifu Park Chil Sung, born in 1930 in what is now North Korea, began learning gong fu within his family as a child and later traveled throughout the Korean peninsula seeking instruction. During the Korean War he was recruited, along with many young men from his town, to fight as a guerrilla aligned with the South. After the war he relocated permanently and later worked in hand-to-hand combat training connected to South Korean intelligence services. From the 1970s onward he taught near the DMZ, where many of his students were U.S. military personnel."

This background was reflected in the way he taught. When asked about the application of a movement performed from the ground, he explained it simply as picking up dirt and throwing it into an attacker’s eyes—a direct, survival-oriented interpretation rather than a sportive one.

His method, CMA in general, the traditional ideal is not prolonged “trading of blows,” but gaining position, breaking timing and structure, resolving the encounter quickly once an opening appears. This is often associated with the idea of 短打 (duǎn dǎ)—close, decisive fighting aimed at rapid resolution rather than extended exchange.

 

[Badhabits]

It is an interesting question. You didn't just ask when is it no longer a martial art. You asked when does it become performance art. Those are two different things. It's easier to say when it's just no longer a martial art b

 

[isshinryuronin4 3]

What defines "directly related"? being able to push/pull with a lot of force is directly related to combat, so would pushups and pullups be a martial art? You can't argue that if you take 2 people of equal experience and skill level but one has a higher level of overall athleticism and made them fight that the more athletic one wouldn't win the majority of the time. So, if running, weight training, calisthenics, etc. directly relate to being able to fight better then by your definition, wouldn't something like CrossFit be a martial art?

No. If attacked, doing pushups, backflips or touching your toes will not help much. They are not directly related to combat. Fitness plays a supporting role for sure, but in itself is not "martial." I tried to make that clear in my post:

While an MA, especially a TMA, contains elements of spirit and fitness along with self-defense, when the emphasis is not directly combat related,

To address your post's logic - A well-nourished fighter will have an edge over a malnourished fighter of equal skill. Would you call eating a martial art? Nourishment plays a supporting role but in itself has no martial application. I think you're stretching the meaning of "directly related to combat." I meant it in a literal sense as a combat move such as strike, takedown, lock, etc., done unencumbered by aesthetic, philosophical or self-development considerations. If over-emphasized, these other elements dilute the martial aspects of MA.

When an LEO on the street has to face an armed suspect or restrain a resisting one, training time spent on political correctness, public optics and office politics means less training time and mindset on "directly related" skills like catching the bad guys and keeping from getting injured or killed. The core function of a cop gets diluted. I'd guess most LEO's (other than the bureaucrats upstairs) would agree. I see this as comparable to the MA subject at hand.

I'm kind of surprised there is debate on the OP question as to the meaning of martial. Is my view too draconian and old school? Perhaps I'm just a victim of being too old.

 

[Badhabits]

No. If attacked, doing pushups, backflips or touching your toes will not help much. They are not directly related to combat. Fitness plays a supporting role for sure, but in itself is not "martial." I tried to make that clear in my post:

To address your post's logic - A well-nourished fighter will have an edge over a malnourished fighter of equal skill. Would you call eating a martial art? Nourishment plays a supporting role but in itself has no martial application. I think you're stretching the meaning of "directly related to combat." I meant it in a literal sense as a combat move such as strike, takedown, lock, etc., done unencumbered by aesthetic, philosophical or self-development considerations. If over-emphasized, these other elements dilute the martial aspects of MA.

When an LEO on the street has to face an armed suspect or restrain a resisting one, training time spent on political correctness, public optics and office politics means less training time and mindset on "directly related" skills like catching the bad guys and keeping from getting injured or killed. The core function of a cop gets diluted. I'd guess most LEO's (other than the bureaucrats upstairs) would agree. I see this as comparable to the MA subject at hand.

I'm kind of surprised there is debate on the OP question as to the meaning of martial. Is my view too draconian and old school? Perhaps I'm just a victim of being too old.

It's not just the meaning of martial- it's when does it stop being martial and become performance art. Cardio kickboxing isn't really martial but it's not performance art either.
It's not an easy question.

 

[Badhabits]

I know a girl who was raised in the martial arts and is very talented. She can run circles around me in a tournament format. She's also a gymnast. In fact, she can run circles and do backflips around me, literally. And she can make those backflips work in a " martial" way. When I look at her demonstrating/doing kata she made up I think it's performance art. And then you spar with her and she makes what you think is performance art work for her. Not so cut and dry.

 

[isshinryuronin4 3]

It's not just the meaning of martial- it's when does it stop being martial and become performance art. Cardio kickboxing isn't really martial but it's not performance art either.
It's not an easy question.

Cardio kickboxing I think is marketed mainly as exercise, using "kickboxing" as a hook. This is what's emphasized I think, more than self-defense. It mimics an MA to pursue fitness (the main) goals. From my understanding of it, it wouldn't qualify in my mind as an MA.

 

[Gyakuto114 123]

It is an interesting question. You didn't just ask when is it no longer a martial art. You asked when does it become performance art. Those are two different things. It's easier to say when it's just no longer a martial art b

I think the inference is that once ‘it’ loses its combat effectiveness, proved in aggressive combat against an uncooperative, fully resisting enemy, it is a performance art.

I know a girl who was raised in the martial arts and is very talented. She can run circles around me in a tournament format. She's also a gymnast. In fact, she can run circles and do backflips around me, literally. And she can make those backflips work in a " martial" way. When I look at her demonstrating/doing kata she made up I think it's performance art. And then you spar with her and she makes what you think is performance art work for her. Not so cut and dry.

If you’ve seen ‘Blade Runner’, you’ll have an idea of how back flipping etc can be used as an attack! But is it a martial art? Yes, if driving an automobile at an enemy is a MA. Yes, if throwing an operating lathe at an enemy is a MA. Yes, if hurling a sack of venomous snakes at an enemy is a MA…So no!

 

[Gyakuto114 123]

There is actual evidence for MMA. (Sort of)

So if we suggest that MMA incorporates the ideas of a lot of combat sports in a more flexible rule set.

Then we look at real world scenarios of combat sports being used.

Then we can get an idea of how adaptive it is as a martial art.

So for example. This is shivworks which is essentially a weapon system. Exept it uses wrestling as its core concepts.

The gracie Safewrap system. That uses BJJ.

Crikey you can post multi-syllabic, thoughtful responses rather than your usual Zen-like minimalist ones

MMA is not a performance art. It is ugly, it’s ungainly, it’s vicious and its mechanics tends to favour those with more brute strength and large physical size. It the antithesis of combat-based pastimes as we know them today. At best, you could say any idea of beauty lies in its extreme utility although beauty is in the eye of the beholder and perhaps seeing a fighter lose more of the already few brain cells they possess during a choke- or knocked out might be seen as beautiful by some

Perhaps martial art (utility)/performance art (beauty) are on the opposite ends of a continuum and each combat sport can be place somewhere along it. MMA at one end, Aikido more towards the other, although deciding where they sit on that line is likely to be highly subjective and possibly contentious without the crucible of fire that is aggressive, uncooperative fully resisting combat.

 

[HighKick]

Crikey you can post multi-syllabic, thoughtful responses rather than your usual Zen-like minimalist ones

MMA is not a performance art. It is ugly, it’s ungainly, it’s vicious and its mechanics tends to favour those with more brute strength and large physical size. It the antithesis of combat-based pastimes as we know them today. At best, you could say any idea of beauty lies in its extreme utility although beauty is in the eye of the beholder and perhaps seeing a fighter lose more of the already few brain cells they possess during a choke- or knocked out might be seen as beautiful by some

Perhaps martial art (utility)/performance art (beauty) are on the opposite ends of a continuum and each combat sport can be place somewhere along it. MMA at one end, Aikido more towards the other, although deciding where they sit on that line is likely to be highly subjective and possibly contentious without the crucible of fire that is aggressive, uncooperative fully resisting combat.

It appears you are drawing Very hard lines categorically. It is either 'utility' or 'performance' and there is nothing else. In reality, there are a Great many school/styles/tactics that overlap your all too subjective descriptions.

I have been saying this for a decade or better. There is a Great Amalgamation of styles happening in real time. MMA has been a powerful accelerant of this, but it was already happening well before MMA ever gained traction. There was this obscure, never heard of sport called wrestling that a great many kids did in grade school and college that many of them graphed into their martial arts training/teaching. It never had any official titles, but just like other lifetime influences, it has changed the way things are being taught. Add to this the saturation knowledge of martial arts in general, and it just makes sense.
In reality, there are Very few styles that are 'pure', taught exactly the way they were 50-100 years ago.

Think of it this way, how many people do see actively practicing armored knight fighting as a self defense?