Drunken Monkey Posted December 30, 2003 Posted December 30, 2003 i think that you think that he thinks i was talking about what he thought he was taking about what he was thinking about talking about what i was thinking that he was talking about.... post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Rich67 Posted December 31, 2003 Posted December 31, 2003 KF San Soo, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, Thai Boxing, Standard boxing, and any base martial art (ie Tae Kwon Do, Judo, Tang Soo Do,etc.) Nowadays, a good practical fighter has knowledge in a lot of different arts, and knows how to apply them in a situation. That is why the original UFC was classified as a "mixed martial arts" tournament. You can't win a street fight or a MMA tournament simply by knowing how to punch and kick only, or knowing only 1 style. With the new UFC rules though, it's anyone's game now. But back in the starting days when they had no rounds or time limits, BJJ and Royce Gracie always came out on top (or on bottom, but still won). The original UFC was a lot more true-to-life than it is now. Granted, many pure street fighters have no knowledge of martial arts or grappling, but YOU need to be prepared for any eventuality. Do you get a resume from the guy who's about to pound you? You never know who you're dealing with. I'd say start off with a decent stand up fightning skill and also get well versed in ground fighting in case you get dumped. If your opponent wrestled in high school, then you're at a distinct disadvantage. Mixed Martial Artist
jeffrogers Posted January 11, 2004 Posted January 11, 2004 yeah but no one had knowdlege of Jiu-JItsu back then. Same ufc rules and royce against alot of those apponents like Kimo and shamrock and he would get his * handed to him. But back then they gracies had a better visioin they new martial artist in America didn't have a good grasp on those aspects plus they were use to fighting diffrent styles with thoe rules created in the first ufc. Which was what no biting and poking out the eyes I believe. But you have your point you got to be more rounded. Back in the orginal UFC it was about martial artist. But now its evolved into what I would call martial atheletes.
Treebranch Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 I also think that real masters didn't want to be bothered with it. There are many MA masters that don't compete, so who knows what kind of fighters are out there. "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"
jeffrogers Posted January 17, 2004 Posted January 17, 2004 So true Treebranch few didn't want to fight and tehy probably were or are good fighters. Others well they probably didn't want to fight becasue they new they couldn't. So the hid behind morality of Karate. How it should be only for self defense, or developing character or what not. -Jeff
Practice is the key _ Posted January 22, 2004 Posted January 22, 2004 Karate,Muy thai,kung fu and me Somone love oneSomone love twoI love one That one is myself just have been turn down....
Treebranch Posted January 22, 2004 Posted January 22, 2004 This is the question. What is a Combative MA? Are we talking about Combat MA's? If we are I'd say Karate, Muy Thai don't really fit in here. Depending on what Kung Fu it may be a Combat MA. I would think that MA's that were specifically designed for Combat whether in the present or past would be the MA considered Combat MA's. For example Krav Maga was actually designed for Combat. San Soo, Jujutsu, Arnis and others. "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"
Drunken Monkey Posted January 22, 2004 Posted January 22, 2004 i still say it boils down to how you train in the martial art. we've said before that just because you are practicing a 'superior' martial art, it doesn't mean that you are a 'superior' fighter. i think the same applies to combative martial arts. just because your style is combative, does it make you a combative martial artist? hmm, i know that sounds really wrong but somewhere in that mess of a post, is my point.... post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Treebranch Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 I agree sound training methods are the key to being a good fighter. So if the training methods were exactly the same across every MA, than the Combat MA's would be that most efficient at killing or maiming someone if you had to. Combat MA's were designed for such a purpose. They were not designed for competition, there are other MA's for that. So if we lived in a perfect world and everyone taught and trained hard like most sport MA's we would all be singing a different tune when it comes to Combat MA's. There are people who train very hard in Combat MA's, but they don't compete. These people many times have jobs doing really mean things to people or are hired a secret service and stuff like that. Or they are just serious practitioners who love to do this stuff. I'm not making judgements on other MA's, it's just my opinion. "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"
Drunken Monkey Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 y'know, i've never actually put the two together like that. now that IS a good question. if everyone trains in the same way (so to speak), would there emerge a 'better' type of martial art? oooh, i can see arguments brewing... post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Recommended Posts