Treebranch Posted November 24, 2004 Posted November 24, 2004 Yeah but what in a clinch or when grappling? These things can get someone to leap off of you. Nobody wants to lose an eye. I agree, I wouldn't try for these targets in the moment, but if it presents itself will you know how to take advantage of it? That's all I'm really saying. There are strikes that aren't meant to knock out or destroy someone, they are strikes that open up opportunities for locks and or throws. "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"
judoguy Posted November 24, 2004 Posted November 24, 2004 good post. Landing a strike to the eyes will give you an advantage, but the problem is actually landing it. I don't put alot of faith in eye or throat strikes for the fact that the head is moving, hands are up, chin is down, etc. (ideally, anyway). That makes these targets much harder to hit. Good post. You can also add in adrenaline which changes everything. It has been well documented that when the body is under the influence of adrenaline that you lose accuracy and you would be hard pressed to land a solid blow to the throat or the eye's. Hell even balls are hard to get to when your fighting hard. Fortunatly you can train to overcome this with adrenal stress training offered by various "reality based" martial art instructors out there. In my experience the feeling a person get's in the ring is totally different then the one you get in a street fight. I'm only going to ask you once...
judoguy Posted November 24, 2004 Posted November 24, 2004 Yeah but what in a clinch or when grappling? These things can get someone to leap off of you. Nobody wants to lose an eye. I agree, I wouldn't try for these targets in the moment, but if it presents itself will you know how to take advantage of it? That's all I'm really saying. There are strikes that aren't meant to knock out or destroy someone, they are strikes that open up opportunities for locks and or throws. Another good post. I agree 100% in a clinch you can pull off some nasty stuff. I still say the throat is a long shot but you can definetly gouge the eye's or knee his balls from the clinch. Unless he is trained in how to operate from the clinch of course. I'm only going to ask you once...
judoguy Posted November 24, 2004 Posted November 24, 2004 I hate these stupid terms by the way. Martial Athlete, Mixed Marial arts. Why not just call them martial artists and martial arts? Isn't a "martial athlete" a martial artist? Is a judoka considered a martial athlete? We run, lift weight's, work the medicine ball and stuff. Some martial artists may train more athletically then others but they are still martial artist's. I'm only going to ask you once...
Treebranch Posted November 25, 2004 Posted November 25, 2004 They all are Martial Artists, I guess the word "Athlete" refers to sports. I think MMA fights are great and some of the fighters really know what they are doing. I've seen lots of dvds and videos of NHB fights in which the fighters were nothing more than guys who like to fight, with very little technique involved. They are basically muscle bound thugs that just ground and pound. They know a few things, but I wouldn't call them artists. Some of the top fighters you can see know what they are doing and are not as narrow minded about MA's as the enthusiasts that watch these fights religiously. A true Martial Artist can look at any MA and see things within it that can be very effective and useful in any situation. I wish I had the time and money to train as hard as Sport Martial Artists, but I don't. I've trained hard in other areas of my life and try my best to fill the rest of the time studying MA's. I would love to study a little BJJ and little bit of Kali or even European Saber fighting. Most people have too many interests and not enough time. Anyway, I'm rambling. "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"
SevenStar Posted November 25, 2004 Posted November 25, 2004 I hate these stupid terms by the way. Martial Athlete, Mixed Marial arts. Why not just call them martial artists and martial arts? Isn't a "martial athlete" a martial artist? Is a judoka considered a martial athlete? We run, lift weight's, work the medicine ball and stuff. Some martial artists may train more athletically then others but they are still martial artist's. I completely agree. to me, all "martial sports" are indeed martial arts, and tend to fit the definition MORE than traditional styles, actually. People talk about all of the challenges in the old days, how hard the training was, etc. Where is it now? Instead of challenges, you have the sport guys competing, and in general, they train harder because of that....it seems like they are more aligned with the old guys, IMO, but I digress. The fact that they are used in a sporting venue means that they have rules, and this is why many people draw the delineation - we fight with rules, they "don't". As for judo, yeah, it's a sport. There's alot of tradition involved, as I know you know, but judo is not one of the koryu arts and is therefore considered modern. Some people also make the delineation based on training methods. Thai boxing has been around for centuries, but they run, hit bags, do padwork and fight. they don't do stance work, forms, internal strength, etc. - the training isn't conducted in a "traditional" manner.
judoguy Posted November 28, 2004 Posted November 28, 2004 I completely agree. to me, all "martial sports" are indeed martial arts, and tend to fit the definition MORE than traditional styles, actually. People talk about all of the challenges in the old days, how hard the training was, etc. Where is it now? Instead of challenges, you have the sport guys competing, and in general, they train harder because of that....it seems like they are more aligned with the old guys, IMO, but I digress. The fact that they are used in a sporting venue means that they have rules, and this is why many people draw the delineation - we fight with rules, they "don't". As for judo, yeah, it's a sport. There's alot of tradition involved, as I know you know, but judo is not one of the koryu arts and is therefore considered modern. Some people also make the delineation based on training methods. Thai boxing has been around for centuries, but they run, hit bags, do padwork and fight. they don't do stance work, forms, internal strength, etc. - the training isn't conducted in a "traditional" manner. All very valid points. I belive the distinction lies somewhere in the middle between Training methods and types of techniques. I will say this until the cows come home and I know it's not PC but I do think that some styles are just flatout better then others. It can also mean dead styles or styles that are no longer actively growing and evolving with the times. And yes Judo is considered a modren style and it does adapt as far as training methods and such. I'm only going to ask you once...
Steve_K Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 uhh... a reverse punch is a very practical technique, I use it all the time.
elbows_and_knees Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 the traditional revers punch requires you to chamber the hand - VERY impractical. an example of a modified version of the reverse punch is boxing's cross. the hand is kept up by the face. Perhaps that is what was being referred to.
Sengra Posted September 9, 2005 Posted September 9, 2005 This question really bothers me...in connection with this topic...can a modernday olypic gold medalist fencer defeat a swordsman, say from the age of Louis XIV? The stronger swordsman does not always win.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now