Martial_Artist

My opponent was an idiot. He did move slow. I still kicked him. It doesn't change the underlying logic of the attack. Why waste time working on blocking and then countering when a direct hit(punch or kick) is so much more efficient? Answer: It is inefficient to wait for your opponent in that situation to deliver his attack(haymaker). It is vastly more efficient and effective to simply hit him first: faster and harder. MA.

ZR440, that's actually very correct. According to statistics there are 2.5million crimes prevented by gun-totin' citizens. Approx. 0.09% of those actually involve the citizen shooting the suspect. The rest are prevented by merely brandishing or the threat of deadly force. If anyone actually wants full statistics on how guns in the hands of citizens are good. Then PM me and I'll provide some links. MA.

mikS, Are you not fast enough to deliver a front kick to under the jaw as your opponent is pulling back for a haymaker? Then you wouldn't believe why I suggested such a thing. I have done such a thing and the fight ended there. MA.

In the movie The Hunted with Benicio Del Toro and Tommy Lee Jones they used Sayoc Kali, a Filipino Marital Art. It was not Wing Chun. EDIT::Martial Artist:: I corrected the name of the martial art. It is not Silat Kayoc but Sayoc Kali.::

Howdy, Welcome to KF.

The three guys in the parking lot weren't drunk, but they sure weren't the brightest pebble in the river if you know what I mean. They were pretty much standing right next to one another walking towards me. They didn't see my kicks. They were trying to pounce me. I met them first and kept them out of close range. The whole ordeal lasted approx. less than three seconds. Three guys came at me and I kicked them all really fast. It's not that hard a thing to conceive. If I can kick as fast as you can punch then I will beat you every time because my leg is longer than your arm and a whole lot more powerful. Yes, kicking can leave you vulnerable, but then again so can a missed punch. I have taken many a poor punch and used that to defeat the rhythm of my opponent and win the fight. About the other times. Luck had nothing to do with it. I don't believe in luck. If something is going to happen it's either because of my training or because of the lack of my training. Those are the only forces that affect my fighting. Either I have trained enough or I haven't trained nearly enough. I have had demonstration fights with guys who say the same thing, "Come on, you can be so easily taken of with high kicks..." and every single one has learned something new about high kicks. Now, all of this goes back to my original statement. Not every tool will handle every situation. Sometimes a kick to the head is not the best option. There's no argument there. But sometimes a kick to the head is the best tool for a certain job and I won't be caught not having that tool in my toolbox. MA.

Howdy and welcome.

Welcome to KF.

6'3" 215lbs-220lbs(I fluctuate all the time, been as low as 197, but didn't like it.) Built like a greek god.

High kicks not gonna happen? Hey WingChun, tell that to the three guys I knocked out outside a parking lot of a billards hall with three high kicks. Head, neck, and solar plexus(the last guy wasn't really knocked out, but he was screaming like a girl while writhing on the ground, so he was out of the fight.) Or tell that to the guy who jumped me behind a 7/11 with a stick and the roundhouse to the side of his face that ended that fight. Or tell it to the wierdo who tried to attack me with a pair of nunchaku as part of his gang-initiation who fell from a high roundhouse to his solar-plexus. I could go on, but these comments are really stupid, right? I mean I could use high kicks, but it's never going to happen, right? To that, my friend, all I can say is: if you want to limit yourself, that's your choice. High kicks, done properly can end confrontations quickly. As I said before, you should be able to do them as easily as you can punch, because you never know when you might want to use a tool to end a conflict and then realize you don't have that tool. But, then again, what do I know of it? MA.

No argument.

Anybody ever try the Chat?

Welcomd back Kensai. Always a pleasure. MA.

Welcome to KarateForums. Enjoy. MA.

I train at home: 100%. Approx. 2 hrs a day. I have my own equipment for strength training and aerobic training. My backyard is where I train, I have a nice little training area. I used to teach outdoors in the Philippines, but I didn't train where I taught.

Welcome, even if a bit belated.

Welcome.

I think most gritty-gym boxer can take the trash out on the majority of contemporary martial artists. They just train at a higher level of intensity. The average martial artist is soft, not very strong, and weighs little. Also, many contemporary martial artists simply do not train as hard, with as much pain, as do most boxers. Hardcore boxers do much to defeat contemporary martial artists. However, a contemporary martial artist that has trained hard, is strong, well-built, put the pain in to get his gain, and worked on fighting will have the advantage over the boxer. If it is a comparison of pure technique the well-trained contemporary martial artist has a much more vast arsenal of weaponry from which to attack from. There is a greater chance of him doing something the boxer doesn't expect and gaining advantage. Put it into people speak and the boxer, who very well might have been a street brawler before, just might rush you and beat your face down with so much aggression you might not know what to do. Just as easily the contemporary martial artist just might be a cool headed individual who can handle a crazed attacker. I think when referring to boxing the judgement of its effectiveness is based more on the boxers themselves. Many of which grew up on the street and brawl with the best of them. And brawling isn't something most contemporary martial artists train for. But, as for boxing as an art(which by the way boxing is just as much a martial art as say Tai Chi or Aikido) it's just too limited to be on any interest to me. As for experience, it's almost irrelevant for me to list anything about my personal dealings with very good boxers. (Both my Uncles were Golden Gloves, my cousins box, and a roommate of mine was a boxer from American Samoa) Not to mention the fights I have had with boxers. My individual experience and training puts the boxer on an unfair playing field and making such a comparison doesn't prove anything. I have beaten every boxer than has attacked me. Does that make boxing ineffective, or a useless art? Absolutely not. So, asking me to base my opinion on my personal experience with boxers is somewhat erred. I base my opinion strictly on the arts and leave reality to the user. So, for me to say that boxing sucks just because of my personal experience with boxers basically bears no validity. I have a friend, if who fought a boxer, would most certainly have his arse handed to him. Now, does boxing become a very effective art? From his 'experience' boxing has just proven effective. But wait, from mine boxing has been proven ineffective. Boxing, more importantly boxers, when analyzed for what it is is a force to be reckoned with. However, it's effectiveness is going to be based on your ability to deal with it. As for wanting to take boxing as your primary self-defense art, I wouldn't recommend it. You'll be robbed of a lot of necessary skills that boxing just doesn't teach. You would learn a lot, but you would also be training with a lack. That being said, I'm done. MA.

I don't know the whole thing looked goofy to me. For one, the guy doing the punching had no power behind his punching. Also, being punched on the top or crown of your head won't do much of anything to you anyways, unless there is a lot of power and you're being hit with a very solid object. Also, the guy in the headlock was pretty dumb to let himself get there. IF his opponent had any amount of training the guy could have suffered some serious neck injury. So, it doesn't seem like he was very skilled at all because the movie started out with him in a headlock. Watch the punches again, they kinda look even pulled a bit, this movie could have been staged. About grabbing a guy and throwing them down. Almost every single untrained person tries something like that. They don't know any better. Many friends in my youth had no martial arts training and when fighting around wrestling was what they tried to do, because the gross movements were the only thing their bodies could do under the stress. About anyone being able to do a move like the guy did in the video, I'm going to have say most anyone will try something like that. If not lifting the guy up, at least try to wrestle him to the ground. And yes, anybody watching wrestling will have a higher chance of doing something like that. That's because a movement like that requires no fine motor skills 0r muscle-memory conditioning to accomplish. I find comparing the backdrop to a sidekick ridiculous. Any fool can pick another up and drop them. Doing a sidekick effectively isn't done by the average idiot. A friend of mine was an avid WWE viewer with his brother. That's all they did were those stupid moves from the show. Then, you have those idiots who do their own backyard WWE. I doubt they've had excellent training in the arts of picking up your opponent and dropping them. They just copy what they see on TV. As for doing the same for martial arts. Sure, someone can watch the KarateKid and think they know karate, but such refined motor-skills they will not be able to execute properly in a fight. They might try to kick, but it will only cost them. (Unless they're lucky enough to have a dote for an opponent). The video, at the very least, had minimal entertainment value and almost no educational value. It showed one dope fighting another. It's a good thing that the 'wrestler' didn't get jumped by the other guy's friends when he was that headlock or when they went to the ground. I've said it in the past wrestling is not the best thing for street fighting. You take too many risks and put yourself at too much a hazard to external and internal dangers for it to be worth using as your primary defense on the street. Maybe if the standing guy actually hit somewhere vulnerable or began to put a vise on the wrestlers esophagus the fight would have gone elsewhere. Seeing as how the wrestler didn't even try to strike to the groin or break a finger I don't think was that serious. May have just been a yard-fight between two acquaintances. If someone one the street had by some miracle got me in a headlock I would break some fingers, bite a chunk out of his arm, and strike in the groin to get him to release. MA.

Well, Kensai, it sure will be odd without Aikido's staunchest supporter. I reiterate the opinion I shared with Tobias. Perhaps, someday, you'll better understand communal learning and return to add your best to help others better themselves. Leave with no ill-will, and your memory will be better remembered. Good luck in your future and the path your feet carry you. MA.

Too bad you feel that way Tobias. You have a lot to offer and to choose not to offer because you feel it's repetitive is somewhat weak. It's your choice, and I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors. I bear you no ill-will, but will miss "debating" traditional kabudo with you. Hopefully, someday, you'll realize that the point of communal learning to put aside the assanine and look for the good and add your best where you can. Take care. Enjoy the path your feet take you. MA.

You know what, Jerry? I have sufficiently explained how to accomplish defeating a bo at close distance and the mechanics behind doing such. Further need to demonstrate to "you" is not what I'm trying to accomplish. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. As I stated I am clarifying to the other readers who may not understand how the mechanics work behind jamming, countering, clinching, and otherwise breaking the offense of a staff. About jamming, I have twice demonstrated how to. Both times also involved taking out the wielder of the staff at the same time. The point of the jam explained, as brief as it was, was to ultimately remove the wielder from capacity to act. As for the SCA I'm not applying SCA rules to jamming a staff. You brought that up. Get close enough to a staff and the ability of the staff to perform is removed. I'm not talking about simply approaching the staff and taking hold of it idly. I'm talking about ending the conflict by approaching the staff and removing the wielder. Taking a hit to the hand/forearm in exchange for a hit to the thigh/leg/back at close range is more than fine in order to deliver a punch to the face of the opponent, jam his movements, contest the weapon and end the fight. So, yes, regardless of the hand I choose to use my body will be positioned so that whatever counter the wielder of the bo tries to use(seeing as the counter can only come from the opposite end of the weapon[not including if the wielder decides to let go and use a free hand to attack]) the first blow will be enough to take and redirect in order to close the range and the counter will be next to useless at that point. Simultaneously, I am attacking the wielder, who is trying to manuever his longarm to get a decent hit. The result is quick, and the effect devastating. But, then again, you've done it before. So, I guess it doesn't matter what I write. However, not all my statements are for your sole benefit. It seems to me that you seemed pretty universal in stating that the bo is not an easy weapon to jam. Which, after all, is the only comment I replied to. Good luck with the SCA, it can be lots of fun, but don't let it overly govern how you think real combat with weapons is done. I have a lot of respect for most SCA guys, but more than a great majority of them don't know what they're doing with weapons. Even if you can only strike from 90degrees. That, there, is a limitation which should send up some red flags about how combat is approached in the SCA. Which is why I only participated as a guest, more of an observer really, and did not join up. MA.

I have allowed a nara (hard philippine wood) nunchaku to be swung at my forearm at full power. My bone didn't break. I got a severe bruise, but no bone breakage. I would tend to think that a nunchaku swung at a stationary target at full strength would hit with more force than a bo being swung at a moving target closing the distance and reducing the power rate. Just for arguments sake. I have jammed a bo-staff by closing the distance and taking a hit to my forearm on the area of the bo closest to the wielder's hand. Regardless of which angle the attacks comes from, low or high, when swung in that manner the closer I am to the pivot point of the attack the less the power of the attack. (A bo staff is a leverage weapon. When swung the power is a torque result. Torquing your hands to turn the bo to hit an opponent. The power of the attack is not at the pivot point. It increases the further down the staff you go. Thus, near the tip is where the most amount of energy is being transfered. Not near the pivot point.) And when hit near the pivot point of the weapon the damage done is not much. IF I do get that close to the weapon then the bo-wielder has to work to regain control of the distance or he's lost. The amount of power generate at no-range is the result of a push and no longer a strike. When pressing the opponent and the distance to the pivot points is closed, if you are struck it will be beyond the focal point of power on the weapon and more of a push against you. In such a circumstance being pushed by a stick is not as effective as being hit by one. Again, just for arguments sake I have done this many times, without pads, when teaching. In case you don't believe me about the bo-staff being a leverage weapon you should visit a website on physics and study how power and force relate to long thin objects being used to strike an opponent. I would include a diagram but that would be presumptuous. And since the weapon has been reduced to a push force at close range, especially when pressing against the opponent, my claim that it can be easily jammed is true. Now, just to clarify a misconception I believe you possess, in the hands of an expert the bo-staff becomes a lethal weapon. However, it is a weapon whose strengths lie in distance control. If the wielder can control the distance the wielder can control the fight. If not, the wielder could very possibly lose the fight. It is not an absolute that the bo can be jammed every single time in close distance. It is a high possibility. I wrote what I wrote to demonstrate that it is just as easy for someone to "demonstrate" the infallability of a technique through words as it is to disprove the very same technique. You claimed that you could easily demonstrate how you could defeat attempts to jam you holding a bo. I merely stated in the same words that I could easily demonstrate conversely through words. And, where does this take us? Most likely nowhere. However, I find it prudent to ensure that every angle is discussed so as to prevent misinformation spread among the less-experienced. To universally claim the bo is a weapon that cannot be jammed easily is not true. It can be when approached properly. Conversely, when wielded properly it becomes more difficult. But, then again, you reached that conclusion at the end of your last post. "...at least if they are using it at all well." MA. Ps. I have participated in the SCA many years ago as a guest of an old friend of mine. I understand the examples you are using, but many of the fighters in the SCA, IMHO, do not use the weapons or counter against them as effectively as they could. Many of the fighters I met just went bonkers on each other, and most of them knew not better how to counter. As simply as a haymaker punch can devastate someone who doesn't know better, so can a weapon in the SCA devastate a target who doesn't know better. Half the people I saw get creamed just simply didn't know any better. MA.

You forgot the category Martial Artist is in: neither East or West.

I listen to movie soundtracks (Last of the Mohicans, CTHD, Lord of the Rings) I also listen to ENYA. I enjoy instrumentals and orchestral w/ chorals. I listen to spanish Shakira(I don't like her english lyrics). I also like good contemporary music. I'm a ridiculous romantic and listen to love songs like a mad rabbit. I also listen to OPM. And classical. And Hawaiian, and native american, and Chage&Aska. MA.