Martial arts rant

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-03-06 09:38pm

It's really interesting to see how all of us are defining "chi."

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-03-06 11:25pm

Next of Kin wrote:
Superman wrote:Don't get me wrong, the Asian styles are great! But yes, a good fighter is a good fighter is a good figher, regardless of the style he/she practices.
Couldn't agree with you more. BTW, I've always looked at chi as breath power. I've found the greatest asset to my martial arts conditioning has been proper, controlled breathing.

Exhale with the blow, man, it makes it far easier to take a hit...

Next of Kin · Post by **Next of Kin** » 2003-03-06 11:28pm

weemadando wrote:Exhale with the blow, man, it makes it far easier to take a hit...

Weemad, that's quite true. One thing I notice about people who are new to martial arts is that they tense up and forget to breathe properly. Of course, this makes it easy for them to be dispatched with quickly. No breath, no power, no big shiney tournament trophy!

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2003-03-06 11:43pm

desertjedi wrote:That said, all anyone needs to do is watch any "fighting Championship" series and see that grapplers will almost always win against a strike (punch and kick) fighter.

Grapplers will win in an UFC type fight because the environment and rules favour them. For one thing the mat is padded and it's a relatively forgiving surface. Think of the number of times you've seen a grappler go upside-down on the mat to get his opponent into a chokehold or submission. Do this on the the street and you'll grind your face off on the concrete and get knocked senseless when the guy you're taking down falls on you and bounces your brainpan off the concrete sidewalk. UFC fights are also "no holds barred", but that does not mean "no techniques barred". You can't do knee stomps, throat strikes, or eye gouges which are very effective fight ending striking techniques. If you allowed this you'd have a lot of dead and crippled combatants in a very short time.

You can not judge the effectiveness of a martial art based on some "fighting championship" series because they have these pesky little things called rules. Depending on the rules, one type of martial art will prove to be best, and in this case it's grappling. Remove the rules and it's a whole different ballgame.

ArmorPierce · Post by **ArmorPierce** » 2003-03-06 11:48pm

So what if they define it as super natural? In actuallity, when they thought they were using chi, it was actually a state of mind, concentrating on doing what has to be done and then letting it happen.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-03-07 01:25am

I remember when I first started CQC, my first instructor was also a 7th dan Ju Jitsu, who dismissed this 'chi' stuff as the nonsence it is. He told me that chi is nothing but a lot of pratice and concentration during training on proper method. That method is the result of body mechanics, ie how your body moves and what it physically can and cannot do. There is nothing superstious or mystical about it.
Of course CQC is a fighting method that uses the scientific method in its training, so we dislike all that mystical crap anyway, cause we know its crap thanks to a bit of science

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-03-07 01:47am

Mackey, I would agree.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-03-07 01:55am

Superman wrote:Mackey, I would agree.

Why thank you

Next of Kin · Post by **Next of Kin** » 2003-03-07 05:28pm

aerius wrote:...You can't do knee stomps, throat strikes, or eye gouges which are very effective fight ending striking techniques. If you allowed this you'd have a lot of dead and crippled combatants in a very short time.

You can not judge the effectiveness of a martial art based on some "fighting championship" series because they have these pesky little things called rules. Depending on the rules, one type of martial art will prove to be best, and in this case it's grappling. Remove the rules and it's a whole different ballgame.

I'm not a big fan of tournaments because of the rules restrictions imposed on combatants. Lets face it, punching each other for a point isn't true budo.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-03-07 09:02pm

Next of Kin wrote:
I'm not a big fan of tournaments because of the rules restrictions imposed on combatants. Lets face it, punching each other for a point isn't true budo.

And throwing/tripping someone into a gutter and then using the asphalt as a cheesegrater for their face is?

Next of Kin · Post by **Next of Kin** » 2003-03-07 10:10pm

weemadando wrote:
Next of Kin wrote:
I'm not a big fan of tournaments because of the rules restrictions imposed on combatants. Lets face it, punching each other for a point isn't true budo.
And throwing/tripping someone into a gutter and then using the asphalt as a cheesegrater for their face is?

That would be one heck of a tournament! However, to answer your question no it isn't. Don't forget Weemad that true budo means to deprive your opponent of all power. In that case, you either kill or seriously injure someone so they cannot fight back.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-03-07 10:22pm

Next of Kin wrote:
weemadando wrote:
Next of Kin wrote:
I'm not a big fan of tournaments because of the rules restrictions imposed on combatants. Lets face it, punching each other for a point isn't true budo.
And throwing/tripping someone into a gutter and then using the asphalt as a cheesegrater for their face is?
That would be one heck of a tournament! However, to answer your question no it isn't. Don't forget Weemad that true budo means to deprive your opponent of all power. In that case, you either kill or seriously injure someone so they cannot fight back.

Indeed, It just annoys me how mainly the mystic crap and the 'we do it this way because grand master Bob taught this in the 15th century so it must be brilliant' stuff has taken over from something that uses the scientific method to establish what works and what does not work.

Next of Kin · Post by **Next of Kin** » 2003-03-07 10:28pm

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Indeed, It just annoys me how mainly the mystic crap and the 'we do it this way because grand master Bob taught this in the 15th century so it must be brilliant' stuff has taken over from something that uses the scientific method to establish what works and what does not work.

Interesting you should bring up masters because in the one art that I am studying, Yoshinkan Aikido, there will be a seminar in Georgetown, Ontario that features the son of Gozo Shioda, Yasuhisa (sp?). The cost is 35 dollars per 1.5 hour session whether you want to watch or participate. That's highway robbery! There are other masters in Aikido that are heads and tails above this guy, Chida Sensei comes to mind, and they don't command a huge seminar fee because he's the son of the founder.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-03-07 10:36pm

Stuart Mackey wrote: Indeed, It just annoys me how mainly the mystic crap and the 'we do it this way because grand master Bob taught this in the 15th century so it must be brilliant' stuff has taken over from something that uses the scientific method to establish what works and what does not work.

Like I've said in this thread, I've learnt about chi and what it REALLY is and how to use it.

However, in a good ole street fight there is nothing better than a good pair of shoes and fast feet. Chi be damned, I don't know how good those guys are at fighting, how many friends they have, or if they're armed....

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-03-07 11:56pm

Next of Kin wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
Indeed, It just annoys me how mainly the mystic crap and the 'we do it this way because grand master Bob taught this in the 15th century so it must be brilliant' stuff has taken over from something that uses the scientific method to establish what works and what does not work.
Interesting you should bring up masters because in the one art that I am studying, Yoshinkan Aikido, there will be a seminar in Georgetown, Ontario that features the son of Gozo Shioda, Yasuhisa (sp?). The cost is 35 dollars per 1.5 hour session whether you want to watch or participate. That's highway robbery! There are other masters in Aikido that are heads and tails above this guy, Chida Sensei comes to mind, and they don't command a huge seminar fee because he's the son of the founder.

Lol, that happens a lot. one lot of Aikido types here charge a rediculous amount of money as you go up the ranks. you have to pay your monthly sub, no problem there, but you have to pay off the HQ in Japan, and in increasing amounts.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-03-07 11:58pm

weemadando wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote: Indeed, It just annoys me how mainly the mystic crap and the 'we do it this way because grand master Bob taught this in the 15th century so it must be brilliant' stuff has taken over from something that uses the scientific method to establish what works and what does not work.
Like I've said in this thread, I've learnt about chi and what it REALLY is and how to use it.

However, in a good ole street fight there is nothing better than a good pair of shoes and fast feet. Chi be damned, I don't know how good those guys are at fighting, how many friends they have, or if they're armed....

Running ability is all good, but with my fitness levels against one person, I am better to stand and fight, lol. all depends on the situation, but I only use tried and combat tested techniques.