Venezolano Posted March 26, 2004 Posted March 26, 2004 Here nobady is saying bjj is the ultimate art. And also, id you remember a Judoka (Kato) was defeated (choked out) by a Gracie, and yes, Kimura won over Helio, Kimura was one of the best Judokas ever, but that's another topic... Nobody is saying here Judo is bad, i think Judo is great Valencia - Venezuela.
Treebranch Posted March 26, 2004 Posted March 26, 2004 How do these MA's work for you is the question. Have you ever used them in a real fight? Have you used them against experts of other styles? That is the way you evaluate the MA you study. Don't look at others who are great and assume you will be like them. Train yourself hard and experience will bring you the answers. Too many people say I study what he studies so therefore I know what he knows and I can defeat someone. Wrong. That's like saying I study film making so I will make great films. Not necessarily. It all depends on the level of talent you have. So just because a talented individual beat another talented individual doesn't mean the style they studied won. It mean the individual was more talented. For example 2 boxers from the same gym of equal talent fight and one of them wins. Does that mean you blame the gym for the loss. That doesn't make sense, the gym also produced the winner. So in the end it comes down to the goals of the individual and how serious he is. But as far as this thread goes I think we all need to clarify what we all mean by Combative MA's. Remember there will always be someone bigger, stronger, and more talented. The question is how can I defeat him. If you feel that you haven't strength, size or talent to defeat someone like this don't fight or use something other than size, strength, and talent to defeat him. If you can think of ways to defeat someone like this you are on your way to becoming a True Martial Artist. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
granmasterchen Posted March 27, 2004 Posted March 27, 2004 good post treebranch That which does not destroy me will only make me stronger
matt jiujitsufighter Posted March 27, 2004 Posted March 27, 2004 don't put words in my mouth. just makes you look stupid. judo is good if you modify it to work without the gi and improuve the ground game. I also study muay thai and a little kali. I never said bjj was "ultimate art" as you put it. a little boxing, a little wrestling, a little muay thai, and a lot of jiujitsu( brazilian)
Treebranch Posted March 27, 2004 Posted March 27, 2004 Thanks Granmasterchen. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
judoka86 Posted March 27, 2004 Posted March 27, 2004 I think I have hit a soft spot, but I think I worded it incorrectly. So, all of this points to one thing.... it is not the art itself, it is the practitioner. Because BJJ never loses the match, and neither does Judo. It is the practitioner who wins or loses. Also, a second thought.... wasnt this section about the top 5 combative arts. It seems it is an arguement between a guy who has done nhb comps, also a modern martial artist. The other guy who is a practitioner of the traditional martial arts, and is studying for the moral and artistic aspects that the martial arts offer. By the way, treebranch do you study ninpo taijutsu? I have never heard extensively of budo taijutsu. I have a incline that they are similiar if not equal. Sorry if I hit a soft spot anyone. Take a deep breath. Feel your feet gripping the ground. Feel the blood move through your body. Feel your heart beat like a drum. It is amazing what calm and collectiveness can do for you.
Icetuete Posted March 27, 2004 Author Posted March 27, 2004 oh, 2500+ views of this thread the problem of different definitions are what made this thread complicated right at the beginning... i tried to make clear what i would like to talk about in one of the early pages, but who here really took the time and read the 16 pages (expect treebranch maybe, since he was in the discussion from the beginning)? i suppose noone... and who could blame them i can however repeat my definition: a fighting art should cover all ranges of fighting like kicking, punching, elbowing and ground range. like when a guy in a dark alley is about to jump at you from aside. EVERYthing could happen. maybe it comes to a fist fight, then you should know good punches. maybe he takes you by surprise and you are on the ground, so what now? a fighting art should cover that, too. and so on, and so on.... that is why i used the expression "complete system" earlier on, because many words (like fighting art) might be misleading. that was, what this thread should be about in first place. this was an interesting discussion though oh, and btw... please dont insult each other
Treebranch Posted March 29, 2004 Posted March 29, 2004 Judoka86, Yes it is essentially the same. Budo Taijutsu is composed of 6 Samurai fighting Arts and 3 Ninpo schools. The Ninpo aspect sort of permeates the other schools and vice versa. I hope that's what you were asking. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Martial Boy Posted April 8, 2004 Posted April 8, 2004 Never herd of bjj, I got to say muay thai, san sho, karate is my favorite its a wise art.
JLee Posted April 9, 2004 Posted April 9, 2004 ^ you have never heard of BJJ(brazilian Jiu Jitsu??) holy mother of god! its like only the best martial art in the world! just playin, its a really effective and great art that focuses on grappling/ground techniques, probably the best grappling/groundfighitng art
Recommended Posts