Icetuete

good point.

welcome to the forums!!

the topic explains the style of this thread. i give a few "Japanese arts are the best martial arts!" -> i practice a japanese art. "high kicks are useless" -> i cant do high kicks "i dont believe in grades" -> i practiced for years and am still yellow belt "my style is the best" -> i dont know anything about other styles. "competitions are waste of time" -> i never won any competitions "Bruce Lee didnt know what he was talking about!" -> i dont know what Bruce Lee was talking about "the purpose of martial arts is spiritual development" -> i am soo wise its unbelievable feel free to post some more

its hard for me to overlook the nearls 400 posts of the last "jokes" thread so if anyone knows a good one u may as well post the next 400 here

paolung is right. the film industry uses only the fancy stuff with good looks. maybe u should open a thread in the Entertainment section.

u mean someone who makes me do things i until then didnt even think of? my mommy does this no, just kidding. i think i myself match again. when i suck at certain things (school, girls, martial arts, whatever...) the lack "inspires" me to make things better. i dont train to become like someone else and the only person i train for is myself. its my personal desire for some reasons.

i'd rather train a life long in TKD, Kung Fu, shotokan, whatever instead of THIS... this is really hard.

no - dont think so. it might be the older brother of Joe, the pro-Thug. i get what ya mean though. i think desperatness and the will to do harm is not sufficent to be succesful in the streets. otherwise martial arts wouldnt teach to stay calm and everything if it would mean less succes.

the speed makes the TKD kicks powerful, doesnt it?

"my" school offers Judo, TKD, Wushu, Kung Fu and TaiChi.

american constitution? as far as i know u can only add things, cant u? i might be wrong about it though. i think no martial art is so perfect that there cant be anything better/newer or whatever. thats the reason for sooooo many styles i guess. every style was invented to be as good/effective/blah blah as possible but the perfect one wont ever be discovered. so why not experiment a bit and try to get a little closer to perfect? i myself would be satisfied with training the way my instructor understood it. i might think of chaning something when i got my 3rd dan or something which probably is far away though

a wet towel?? dont think so... but who am i to judge...

dont know for sure why i dont like it - perhaps it is because it sounds like the tele-shopping channels that promis this specific hometrainer is better than every other and cheaper and makes u body perfect with only 5 minutes of training each day blah blah... which doesnt mean ur 1-2-3 programm is complete crap. i just like "regurlar" classes with instructors and stuff better.

welcome to the forums! how u doing?

MK vs. SF - yeah; that would be real cool. but how should this look like? i liked the old Street Fighter 2D style. i occasionally play SuperSF2 as well as MK4.

same goes for the following street duel: any kind of martial art VS. the same/any other kind of martial art i dont think crosstraining is needed to well. taekwondo for instance as well includes punches. the high-kicking is only for demonstration purpose and in the olympic duels. and a good any no-joint-looks/grappling artist is able to keep the opponent at distance so grappling is not needed and then throw a good punch+kick combo or whatever. but the crosstraining u talked about certainly cant be wrong because either u might not be able to keep the opponent at distance or ur opponent is a bad grappler and u want to involve him into a closer fight with ur hapkido skills.

maybe u should have posted a poll.

since they arent needed anymore and the whole be-a-ninja stuff is/was way to secret to become a hobby to ppl such as martial arts are today i think: NO, there arent. silent asassination isnt the same as it was in feudal japan anymore so u probably need a sniper scope or whatever instead of cool clothes and ninjitsu abilities to be "succesful".

what do u mean by JUST a sport? is there anything wrong about it? i think it can be both, depending on the way it is taught, just like TKD. while ITD TKD is a martial art to me, WTF TKD is more of a sport. i dont think a martial art has to be invented for war, but for any kind of combat. being able to defend urself without a rifle in ur hands might come in handy in a war though. since judo can be considered rather effective and implies certain aspects of good behaviors (teaches mental values so to speak), i regard it as a martial art. but maybe i know too few about it to REALLY know.

i myself am my own hero. i want to become exactly like he will be in future. and maybe even better in certain issues like martial arts or stuff which doesnt mean i dont look up to anybody. but someone who inspires me? hmhmhm - no; guess theres nobody really.

i pray he did. very true. i think only the best in an art should be "allowed" to offically change things. i mean, everyone can interprete styles the way he wants, but i am not sure whether that always be better. lets take TKD for an example. many ppl bash it (-> think some changes in the system are urgently needed), but it was good enough for the korean army, so why isnt it good enough for me? and the style was a mixture of karate, ancient korean fist and ancient korean leg fight. it worked since about 1955 i think it was so why shouldnt it still work? BUT on the other hand... the styles General Choi used to form TKD have worked for thousands of years and who was this young lieutenant to question the styles with their huge history? his changes made TKD the worlds most famous martial art though... hard to tell in what cases u have to change something and when not. these were just my thoughts.

good peace of info @ TJS!! so how comes that savate doesnt have succes and muay thai does? and how come noone notices that u r MT and not savate? are they so similar? if so - again: why is savate regarded as not as effective as MT?

so whats making MT so effecitve is the brutalness? many other arts invole real hard kicks. savate for instance came up in the streets of paris. they kicked each other with shoes and in the streets there certainly are no ruls. savate is a combination out of the french kicktechniques and british boxing and so can be regarded as both effective and brutal. so why is MT considered so effective while savate is hardly known on this forum?

i think the idea behind this threat was to find out what makes a muay thai kick+punch combo better than a savate kick+punch combo for example. in savate there are no joint locks and stuff as well (at least as far as i am concerned) and it is much like kickboxing. so why is muay thai considered more effecitve? at least that was what i hoped to get answered here.

cant be wrong to have one more expert around - welcome to the forum!