The Meaning of Combat, Fighting, Martial Art, and Violence.

[harmoniouswarrior]

Just learning wrestling alone, doesn't teach someone how to fight.

I work with three bouncers who trained wrestling only that will tell you otherwise..

All I'm going to say on this whole thread is, the four scariest guys I've known in my life--and I've seen war, was in dozens of street figths for silly reasons when younger, taught gang kids for the past 16 years (and buried 15 of them; seen many more get cracked with tire irons, jumped by 5 or 6 to one, shot at but missed, etc.) and so on ad nauseum --these four guys would be white belts if they had ever deigned to enter a martial arts studio. But then, why would they? As a second degree BB in one art, and with years of study in others, I would have stood little chance aginst any of them.

Martial Arts to me is just learning to do the best I can with what I've got. In a real situation--whether real in sport, real on the street, or real in a war zone--it may be enough, it may not. If I'm fighting for a just cause (to me, that means not just to save face, or protect my ego), then my best is enough--even if I 'lose'. As someone (elbows_and_knees?) said, sooner or later we'll all meet our match. I have on a couple of occasions already.

Peace. -HW

[shogeri]

"Learning how to fight, takes a lifetime commitment."

no, it doesn't.

So you are saying that if you stopped training right now, you would be just as good in 5, 10, or 20 years, without furthering yourself, or maintaining the skills you do have???

What if you only trained for 6 months or a year?

What about your skills then after years of absence?

--------------------------

"Unless you are fighting an unknown, within a given sport system you can study your opponent or competitor, and learn what it might take to defeat them. "

depends on the venue and promoter. Some will not give out info about their fighters.

You could always go to a previous fight and watch the other fighters...

------------------------------------

When I say 'how to fight', I mean having the necessary skills in which to consistently, efficiently, and effectively resolve physical confrontation at any given point in time.

-----------------------------

In regards to wrestlers, I can take on the basic 'joe' and do well, without wrestling skills.

That is because I don't try to wrestle them. If I attempted to wrestle, I would possibly lose.

The same goes for if I only did boxing, etc.

--------------------

Wrestling, as taught in schools, and learned on the street, is not fighting. It (like ground fighting) is part of a larger structure of combat strategy and tactics.

My nephews,friends, and stepson are always trying to 'take me on' in wrestling...

I oblige sometimes in order to humor them.

However, I do not just wrestle. I throw in strikes, gouges, throws, sweeps, kicks, locks, and so on.

All they continue to focus on is shooting in, and going for the takedown, and if they are quick enough, and strong enough, then they might get somewhere.

Only one time did I just 'wrestle' one of my nephews. He was all muscle, and strong, but not as quick as I was. It doesn't take much to ignite the bursitis in my shoulders. He overpowered me, but didn't actually out-fight me.

However, when it was finished he limped off, bruised and scratched and torn up. I was a bit sore, but that was it. I had to actually stop from doing things which would have permanently messed him up or injured him by just doing things as a wrestler would.

I tell them now, that I don't play anymore.

-----------------------

"We cannot narrow the term down by using webster definitions here and there. This doesn't do anyone justice. It is better to expand on our understanding of the Martial Arts, and not allow them to be limited in any way. "

by using the dictionary definition you see where these components actually fit. Of course, you can make up classes for them to fit in, but what good is that?

What I mean is that Martial Art is an individuals' interpretation and expression of what it means to build yourself into a better person employing many different facets of life relating to combat, physical achievement, betterment, and so on.

It's the journey. And in theory, the apparent result (at any given point in time) or current destination should be that a person knows how to fight, and or defend their self in the best manner possible.

Muay Thai, wrestling, boxing are methods of fighting that have been used for thousands of years. They have become sport based, due to the culture surrounding the system itself. Muay Thai is deeply rooted in philosophy and spirituality. That is, it is much more than just a sport.

Just because a government says something is a sport, doesn't make it one to every single person in that culture, or outside of that culture.

Everyone has their own opinion of this or that.

I can take a brick, a notepad, a pencil, or a can of coke, or a coke tab, and make them have Martial characteristics.

The same can be said for many sports, traditional Martial Arts, etc.

I believe that the Martial Arts are not being taught as they should.

I believe that there is no one way (method, or technique) to truly win a fight or do so time and time again. It takes an ongoing system of training to win, since one will fight like they train.

I train privately, and differently than most instructors do. I train for effectiveness in action, not knowledge of technique. I train with intent. I consider myself different than most traditional Martial Art instructors in my area.

That's all for now.

Later!

[elbows_and_knees]

All I'm going to say on this whole thread is, the four scariest guys I've known in my life--and I've seen war, was in dozens of street figths for silly reasons when younger, taught gang kids for the past 16 years (and buried 15 of them; seen many more get cracked with tire irons, jumped by 5 or 6 to one, shot at but missed, etc.) and so on ad nauseum --these four guys would be white belts if they had ever deigned to enter a martial arts studio. But then, why would they? As a second degree BB in one art, and with years of study in others, I would have stood little chance aginst any of them.

Martial Arts to me is just learning to do the best I can with what I've got. In a real situation--whether real in sport, real on the street, or real in a war zone--it may be enough, it may not. If I'm fighting for a just cause (to me, that means not just to save face, or protect my ego), then my best is enough--even if I 'lose'. As someone (elbows_and_knees?) said, sooner or later we'll all meet our match. I have on a couple of occasions already.

Peace. -HW

Exactly. great post.

[elbows_and_knees]

So you are saying that if you stopped training right now, you would be just as good in 5, 10, or 20 years, without furthering yourself, or maintaining the skills you do have???

What if you only trained for 6 months or a year?

What about your skills then after years of absence?

No. What I'm saying is that it is irrelevant to "learning to fight". I can teach ANYONE how to fight within two years. They will not be the best in that short time, but they will be able to handle themselves in a confrontation. that doesn't take 20 years. Maintaining your skill level was beyond the scope of your statement, which was merely, learning to fight. And even then, if talking about street fighting, it's not a necessity. Some of the most vicious fighters I've known have been guys with no training at all...

You could always go to a previous fight and watch the other fighters...

you are speaking on a local level. If I go to the thai boxing nationals this year, it will be in a different state than my own. how will I have seen my opponent? Also, what if it was his first fight? I still would not have been able to study him. As I said, that's not always an option.

In regards to wrestlers, I can take on the basic 'joe' and do well, without wrestling skills.

That is because I don't try to wrestle them. If I attempted to wrestle, I would possibly lose.

The same goes for if I only did boxing, etc.

I've heard that several times, and each time, results proved the opposite. The big advantage grapplers have had is that you don't HAVE to try and wrestle them. it's really not that difficult to cover your face and shoot in for a takedown or clinch. Either way, you are now in his realm. Anyway, I won't speak further on this one, because "what if" scenarios drag on forever with no real meaning.

Wrestling, as taught in schools, and learned on the street, is not fighting. It (like ground fighting) is part of a larger structure of combat strategy and tactics.

My nephews,friends, and stepson are always trying to 'take me on' in wrestling...

I oblige sometimes in order to humor them.

It really doesn't matter how many subsets are grouped into the term "fighting". It's still usable in fighting and you can fight with it. as a bouncer, I am not allowed to strike on the job. What does that mean? I wrestle - defend, clinch, subdue. that is the same strategy that grapplers use in the ring as well. Whether or not it by itself is a complete system of fighting is irrelevant - it's still very effective.

What I mean is that Martial Art is an individuals' interpretation and expression of what it means to build yourself into a better person employing many different facets of life relating to combat, physical achievement, betterment, and so on.

It's the journey. And in theory, the apparent result (at any given point in time) or current destination should be that a person knows how to fight, and or defend their self in the best manner possible.

this, I agree with.

Muay Thai, wrestling, boxing are methods of fighting that have been used for thousands of years. They have become sport based, due to the culture surrounding the system itself. Muay Thai is deeply rooted in philosophy and spirituality. That is, it is much more than just a sport.

Not outside of thailand. The reason it's precticed in such a way there is because they are predominantly buddhist - it's part of the culture, not necessarily a backbone of the art itself.

Just because a government says something is a sport, doesn't make it one to every single person in that culture, or outside of that culture.

I see what you are saying here, but that is not the case with thai boxing. It was created with the full intention of being a sport. It's not government deemed, like wushu.

[UseoForce]

I'm with elbows all the way. I'm trained and fairly strong, but I know people with little or know training that would probably take me apart in a street fight.

Oh, and all the other stuff he said was right on .

[Gen_Tora]

Elbows,

Actually Muay Thai was & is used by the Thai Military. It was origionally intented to be used to kill at close range. Traditional Muay Thai includes knife, sword & spear fighting & a very small set of forms for solo practice.

Now on the topic of wrestling & boxing both were part of the roman army's military training, basicly cutting into the two most basic forms of hand to hand combat. striking & grappling. origional roman boxing included knees, kicks, elbows, & head butts kinda like muay thai. Also the anicent greco-roman wrestling techniques included arm bars, wrist lock & choke holds. I hate when people think that whats a sport today was always a sport. Simply put, all "combat sports" started with combat.

And while I agree with both of you & shogeri on allot of points winning a fight comes down to one thing, heart. I've met men & a few women who where either physically better then me; stronger or faster or both or had better technical skills then me. I've never be beaten in a fight, thats not to say I haven't lost one.

I've lost a bunch but, I've also had guys who have kicked the crap out of say they never wonna fight me again because I won't quit until they've seriously hurt me. And even then I refused to stay down.

Muay Thai History Links

http://www.megalodongym.com/MT%20History.htm

http://www.ko-kickboxing.com/features/History/mthistory.htm

http://www.ancientmuaythai.com/styles/muay_thai.htm

Oh yeah & the you don't have to wrestle a wrestler thing. You better shoot him then. Sometimes you don't get a choice, infact you wonna know a 110% proven way to know if you'll survive a street fight. Go pin yourself to the kitchen table by stabbing yourself through the palm of the hand. Actually don't do that, but the point is this sometimes it's gonna be your will power that keeps you alive. Your gonna find yourself in a position where your gonna have to break your own arm just to have a chance to keep fighting. The only thing that will let you survive a fight, on any battlefield (sport, street, iraq or hell's kitch) is your will to survive.

[elbows_and_knees]

Elbows,

Actually Muay Thai was & is used by the Thai Military. It was origionally intented to be used to kill at close range. Traditional Muay Thai includes knife, sword & spear fighting & a very small set of forms for solo practice.

actually, the thai military style is called lerd rit. The striking in it will be like that of muay thai - heck it's just another thai style. Muay thai was NOT intended to kill at close range. Muay thai wasn't even created until the 1920's. Look up the history of arts like muay chaiya and krabbi krabong. Then you will see what you are talking about, not muay thai.

EDIT: Look at the links you posted - ancientmuaythai.com is talking about the origins of muay thai - the previous muay. Those styles are not muay thai, but are styles that led up to the creation of muay thai...

This is from that site:

"Although the government of the time prohibited this style of fighting (with wrapped hands) people still continued to practice the arts and fight underground. Eventually, by introducing rules, and providing fighters with better protection, competition became safer, and the sport of Muay Thai was born.

Here we provide a list of the most popular styles of "Muay Kaat Chueak". This section will attempt to explain the defining characteristics of each style along with additional background information. "

According to this, muay thai is the muay created in the 1920's...

Now on the topic of wrestling & boxing both were part of the roman army's military training, basicly cutting into the two most basic forms of hand to hand combat. striking & grappling. origional roman boxing included knees, kicks, elbows, & head butts kinda like muay thai. Also the anicent greco-roman wrestling techniques included arm bars, wrist lock & choke holds. I hate when people think that whats a sport today was always a sport. Simply put, all "combat sports" started with combat.

I agree with this.

And while I agree with both of you & shogeri on allot of points winning a fight comes down to one thing, heart. I've met men & a few women who where either physically better then me; stronger or faster or both or had better technical skills then me. I've never be beaten in a fight, thats not to say I haven't lost one.

Not really. It depends on where you are. In the street, yeah, I can agree with that. In the ring, it will get you hurt. Like morgan freeman said in "million dollar baby" - 'show me a man that is all heart and no skill, and I'll show you a man who is just anxious to take a beating.'

[elbows_and_knees]

All MAs are theory, I haven't done a tournament in 6 years & even then I was much liked when I was. See the thoery of neo-traditional* Martial Arts is applying form, technique & prinicple to real world skills. The thoery of sport arts is applying the ring to the street, a big gap. Traditional MA have a similar disadvange to most sport systems.

True, all ma are built on principles and theories, but not everyone training in a given ma has TRIED these theories. In which case, it's still very theoretical, as they have yet to apply it.

I encounter this all the time. When I was training CMA, I was showing some grappling techniques to a guy who was planning on entering a grappling tournament. One of the senior students came up to us and said "yeah, but in real life, you just hit him in the throat or kick him in the nads", but when we sparred and I invited him to even touch my throat - he couldn't. I know it CAN be done, but HE couldn't do it. This is what I mean by theory vs. application. In thai boxing, judo, etc. we get a lot of application time in the form of rolling and sparring. I really didn't get much of this in CMA. I know there are schools that do, but this was merely my experience.

I ran into another guy who said "boxers have no skill, they just stand there and slug eachother". That alone spoke for itself.

The problem with sports is that they train you for controlled reactions within the land of fair play.

I don't disagree with that. However, those reactions are just as viable on the street. crosses, hooks, elbows_and_knees, etc. they are all capable of dropping someone.

The problems with traditional MA is that allot of conditioning used in the origional days are not politically correct to day. Or simply that a harder path has been made easier for the economical survive of the school or sensei.

Not only that, but with the lack of war, these techniques and methods were no longer needed and were thus dropped. Look at the end of the samurai in japan when they entered peacetime. The problem with that easier path is that is can depreciate your skills.

[Gen_Tora]

actually, the thai military style is called lerd rit. The striking in it will be like that of muay thai - heck it's just another thai style. Muay thai was NOT intended to kill at close range. Muay thai wasn't even created until the 1920's. Look up the history of arts like muay chaiya and krabbi krabong. Then you will see what you are talking about, not muay thai.

Actually allot of those style you mention are still muay thai. I find your logic on this like saying "Because thier are different stystems of Karate before the modernized "karate-do grouping" that they are not truly karate. As for Muay thai not being lethal at close range, I've trained with a few guys when I was stationed over seas who could prove you wrong.

An elbow to the temple or neck can be just a deadly as a knife hand strike, especially if you don't know how to absorb the impact. It doesn't take some secret knowledge or special skill to make an MA lethal only intent.

[shogeri]

These are still some great thoughts, keep posting!

In Goju Ryu, we trained in elbows and knees and joint locks, strike downs, takedowns, and spinning backkicks and so on. Though we didn't do the high roundhouse with the shin, we still did them to the back of the knees.

In Taijiquan we lead, follow, stick to, listen, and then break through the center, using principles found in jujutsu, aikido, wing chun, hao chuan, and so on.

I now implement more elbows and knees, and more takedowns, and more strike downs.

Essentially, what I do now is train to move from striking position to a more aggressive grappling one.

Most of us train or have beened trained to go up against the average joe, and or someone of equal technical ability.

Of course this trend is not always the best thing to do.

It is not whether a style (or method of fighting or sport) is combative or non-combative.

It is whether it can be made to be in the shortest amount of time, with the least amount of effort.

The easier this process is, the closer it was to being Martial or combative in the first place.

Other than some historical discrepancies, and or some philosophical differences or approaches, most of us here are striving for, and or demonstrating that we understand what the Martial Arts are about.

The Martial Arts begin with theory. They apply such theory (or are suppose to).

The application of the Martial Arts is inherently combative.

It is not about violence.

The application of such Martial Art, can be made into a sport, based up the theory and application of conflict, and or pugilism.

That is, people like to demonstrate and or watch these displays of strength, endurance, skill, and sometimes, luck.

When a style is created it represents the strengths, weaknesses, philosophy, goal, and or direction of the person(s) who created it.

People like to do whatever works best for their own needs, wants or desires.

We are human beings, prone to having fallacies.

We are also very adaptive, and or dynamic.

To me fighters ~ fight, whereas Martial Artists are prepared for(or are supposed to be), and wage ~ war.

Just thought I would throw in a few more words...