Karate Vs

[White Warlock]

Hmm... okay, i'll play.

 

I rely on multiple systems, so bear with this long post. Also, remember that the root of any combatant, is the combatant himself... not the system or systems he utilitizes. His will must be strong, his motives honorable, and his actions without hesitation:

 

Boxing cons -

 

no groundwork

 

sport oriented

 

incorrect use of fists (practicing with gloves does that to you)

 

no lower body attack or defense

 

training emphasizes 'pacing'

 

limited clinch skills

 

no weapons training

 

no improvisational training

 

Boxing pros -

 

excellent drills

 

builds stamina

 

good footwork

 

teaches you not to be punch-shy

 

excellent training in upper body impact deflection

 

excellent punching techniques (except for the glove dependency, which encourages hitting fist to skull)

 

competitions

 

Karate vs: A boxer will fare well if he doesn't let up and doesn't provide the karate practitioner an opportunity to gain a bit of distance. Getting inside the karate practitioner's inner space, however, would be the initial challenge. Also, the boxer has a very good chance of breaking his hand during a street confrontation.

 

Wrestling cons -

 

sport oriented

 

no strikes

 

no training in defense of strikes

 

very limited submission techniques

 

encouraged to pin your opponent on his back

 

no weapons training

 

no improvisational training

 

Wrestling pros -

 

excellent drills

 

the best at groundwork control

 

excellent stamina building

 

teaches you to continue despite being hit

 

excellent takedown skills

 

competitions

 

Karate vs: a wrestler will have his biggest trouble just trying to get in. However, if he is able to avoid getting kicked unconscious when he tries to shoot, or smacked around when he tries to clinch, the wrestler will be assured of being able to take the karate practitioner to the ground. Unfortunately, once there, he'll be hard pressed to find a way to capitalize on his advantage.

 

San soo cons -

 

limited to no 'full contact' sparring

 

no competitions

 

pristine drills (assumes nothing goes wrong)

 

does little to counter being 'punch shy' (limited/no sparring, encouraged by pristine drills)

 

limited groundwork

 

most practice is performed at reduced speeds

 

dependency on circular strikes

 

San soo pros -

 

weapons training

 

improvisation training

 

excellent combination drills

 

excellent techniques

 

great use of stances

 

combat oriented (as opposed to sport oriented)

 

a good mix of strikes, throws, locks and vital area study

 

excellent training in opposing body control

 

good training in conflict psychology

 

Karate vs: a san soo practitioner would fare very well against a karate practitioner that is geared toward applying a 'one hit' solution. However, he would have more difficulty against one that throws a multitude of strikes, in rapid succession. A san soo practitioner, if left unimpeded, would rock your world. The catch is, it is not common for a 'trained' combatant to just 'let' you beat him up.

 

I guess i'll run through wing chun, aikido, jjj (japanese ju-jutsu), and a few others at a later time, unless someone else wants to cover those before i get back online. Getting sleepy.

[Ravencroft]

I would have to agree with WW on his earlier post about muay thai and karate. the style only matters so much the most important thing is how you train(versatilility, intensity etc.) as well as how you are taught. it depends on the person above all else, the style is only secondary.

[Mart]

Regarding the punching in boxing not working without the gloves, this is only true if your hands and wrists arent conditioned correctly.

 

If you want proof of this go look up some recent bare knuckle fight videos and see some hard punches going in with no broken hands.

[muaythaifreak]

quote]

 

Dude, it's the person that matters, not merely the system they study. As well, there is the instruction, the intensity of training, and the 'right' they stand behind. I know you're a muay thai freak, but... really... expand your mind a little.

 

I agree with you to a point, However, the system matters more than you give credit for it. If one learns a weapons system such as a 9mm Berreta and goes up against someone trained to use an AK47, it doesn't matter how well you understand the 9mm, or how proficient you are with it. You are outgunned period. You say the system doesn't matter as much as the mindset of the opponents, I disagree with that. You can be a master of whatever you choose, if it doesn't work, it simply does not work. And don't be misled by my name, I have studied TKD, American Karate, And dabbled with Kung Fu. Not to say that I do not like these other arts, They have good points and forms and whatnot, however they simply are not applicable to fighting unless you are fighting someone who uses the same style. I am talking about actually defending yourself in a real world situation. Not point fighting with a ref and judges. I have sparred with countless opponents from countless different styles, the only ones who even come close to being able to do anything without abandoning their proclaimed styles are kyokushin fighters, the rest tend to employ MT strats and techniques in order to compensate for the deficiencies in their own arts. And I did not say that MT was the end all of MA, hence my studies in BJJ. Muay Thai has it weaknesses just like any other form of MA, but then this forum is called "comparative" isn't it?

[Drunken Monkey]

muaythaifreak mentioned in passing an important point that i mentioned before.

 

a lot of styles have very little reference to attacks outside of their own style.

 

you train with your own people, using your own moves or against a set of moves based loosely on what you might encounter.

 

however, no matter how much you try to impersonate a teep, or a biu sau or whatever, unless you are skilled in the style from which the move comes from, it will most definitely not be used as a real practioner will use it.

 

i can hypothersise all i like about what i would do against a tkd guy based on what i know but unless i try i will have no idea what he is likely to do.

 

you can destroy any style in words based on their written principles but do you really know how they will fight?

 

everyone knows what wing chun looks like and how the drills go but how many have actually crossed hands with intent with a wing chun guy?

 

how many have fought gainst a muay thai guy who really wants to kill you as opposed to knock you out?

 

how many has fought against karate, tkd, any style where it really was win or die?

 

it isn't just the style that counts, or the fighter but also the situation.

 

just to point out that i'm not sure if the gun thing works in these discussions as the implications are far greater then those involved with learning hand skills.

[muaythaifreak]

just to point out that i'm not sure if the gun thing works in these discussions as the implications are far greater then those involved with learning hand skills.

 

I would also concede to the fact that firarm use in it self could be considered a martial art. And I do consider it such. Just as a firearm is a weapon for one trained to use such implements, hands, feet, arms, legs etc are the weapons for wich more "traditional" Martial artists are tained. A gun is not much of a weapon unless one knows how to load, charge, aim, and fire it. There is a lot more to the tactical use of a firearm than just thrusting it in front of you and emptying the magazine. Just as a knee is not much of a weapon unless one knows how to employ it in a fight. There is a lot more to the proper use of knees in a fight than just raising your leg.

 

Respectfully,

 

JD

[White Warlock]

I think that's an important point you brought up MTF. Sparring 'outside' of your system does allow you to see how other systems fare up in a 'controlled' and 'friendly' environment, however DM also brings up a very important point that 'sparring' is not a reliable means of determining one system's 'street value.' San sooists don't spar. The system is designed for 'real application' only, and the attitudes impressed are that of 'not exhanging punches.' It is a foriegn concept in san soo because sparring insists on providing an opportunity for the opposition to attack back and to reset.

 

I'm glad you admit muay thai is not the end-all. I think this is the first post you've made that admitted such. I suppose the tone of your earlier posts has caused me to gain a small degree of energy in shutting you down. This is not meant as an attack, but as a means to bring you out of the posturings and into open discussion.

[Drunken Monkey]

my problem with the gun thing in this argument is that one inherently has advantages over the other (9mm vs ak-47).

 

i'm not sure if this is the case with martial arts.

[White Warlock]

Well, there's some reasonable comparisons with a 9mm vs an AK-47.

 

9mm pros -

 

has a short barrel, thus easier to manage in small spaces,

 

can be easily wielded with one hand,

 

easily wielded in close quarters,

 

quick to aim/fire,

 

minimal recoil,

 

excellent at short range

 

9mm cons -

 

poor medium & long range capability

 

low stopping power

 

not a lot of shots in a clip

 

semi-automatic

 

minimal melee functionality (makeshift club)

 

AK-47 pros -

 

melee functionality (especially if you include a bayonet at the end),

 

lots of shots in a clip

 

capable of semi-automatic, short burst and automatic fire

 

decent stopping power (although not nearly as good as other assault rifles)

 

good medium & long range capability

 

AK-47 cons -

 

very hard to wield in close quarters,

 

poor short range capability, due to the long barrel and cumbersome design,

 

requires the use of both hands,

 

slow to aim/fire,

 

sharp, disruptive recoil

 

Okay... silly, but still... it does iterate there is no one perfect weapon.... or style.

[Mart]

No but i know which one im more scared of.

 

Think about it.