Why did karate lose its value?

[Jissen]

I agree with Shorikid. Just because something can't be practiced at wide open throttle doesn't mean it's useless. It means it works.

Small joint locks, eye gouges, groin shots (and others) are illegal in just about every competition in the world, including the UFC "as real as it gets"

They're illegal because they work, not because they don't.

One problem is some people think they can rely only on these 'dirty tactics'...which is of course ridiculous. If you don't have a solid delivery system from which to launch them, they're next to useless.

But if you take away weight classes, rules, safety gear,referees, and instead inject PCP, alcohol, insanity, multiple attackers, possible weapons, and a sincere desire to harm another individual I suddenly find myself wanting to kick said person squarely in the pills, and would definately not teach my daughter or sister to fight fairly with this person.

[tallgeese]

And I have no problems with those tactics taught as self defense. My problem is the proponents of those tactics that sell them as the be-all, end all of combative arts. They are a tool, like any other. They do not render grappling, or any other tactic for that matter, as invalid. Nor are they a solution to countering grappling or any other tactic.

They work, or don't work based on the skill of the user AND the intangibles of real combat which are too numerous to list. Which you make reference too.

I just think that, as a whole, trad arts have grabbed onto those tactics as a way to end just about any fight with a grappler or mma trained fighter and it's simply not true.

[Jissen]

And I have no problems with those tactics taught as self defense. My problem is the proponents of those tactics that sell them as the be-all, end all of combative arts.

You're right, too many people think they (along with kyusho) are some sort of magic formula for winning. They should be used to enhance your art, not replace it.

But the same can be said of people who think the UFC is the ultimate in streetfighting. Sport arts have many limitations as well. I don't get why everyone thinks it has to be "one or the other" ..I think both have legitimate gripes about the other to be honest.

I have found many useful things from both, however...I think the idea behind these dirty tricks is to end the confrontation and escape BEFORE it escalates into a FIGHT.

Some guy gets in your face pointing his finger and running his mouth, wham...eye poke, knee to the balls, take out their knee, slam them into the wall, and I'm already on my way out the back door hopefully without having to "fight" him.

I guess that's one of the biggest differences...the goal. Sport arts are concerned with "winning"

Self defense is about getting to safety, not vanquishing a foe. Completely different mindset.

They are a tool, like any other. They do not render grappling, or any other tactic for that matter, as invalid. Nor are they a solution to countering grappling or any other tactic.

I agree with them being another tool. But I believe they can sometimes render grappling ineffective, not all the time, but nothing is guaranteed. Last time someone tried to armbar me I bit their leg and they were startled and let go.

You can see groin kicks and eye pokes being effective in alot of MMA fights...and they're accidental...with groin protection, and they still work. If the ref didn't stop BJ when he poked Matt Hughes in the eye, BJ likely would have trounced him. That 3 minute time out sure is convenient lol

I just think that, as a whole, trad arts have grabbed onto those tactics as a way to end just about any fight with a grappler or mma trained fighter and it's simply not true.

Some, but I prefer not to pidgeon hole everyone together.

My purpose is hopefully to not have to "fight" with anyone. Just take em out or avoide it.

So far I've always been successful with this approach. I could really care less if I can outgrapple a trained grappler, or out box a boxer. But even so, and the point I think people are trying to make is that the only way I could ever hope to beat Frank Mir or somebody is to cheat, because he's a way better fighter than I am.

I think it unwise to say either side is the ultimate only correct way.

"There are many paths to the top of the mountain, but we can all see the moon once we get there" Okinawan saying.

[tallgeese]

I don't think we're disagreeing a whole lot. I just tend to put less faith in the potential of these tactics, not that I disagree with their usage. However, goals aside, I think mma has taught us a lot about fight prep.

We can all talk about how we don't want to fight. But it's not always a simple as putting a tactic out there that may or may not be effective and escaping. For instance, I work in law enforcement. Striking and leaving isn't an option. Winning a fight and controlling a bad guy is what I have to do. So, I train to fight and win by pressing that conflict towards conclusion.

It's a matter an analyzing needs.

On a side note, it's also important to address your point of different goals. In mma, fighters are conditioned to utilize those breaks given them when an illegal tactic is used. It's part of game planning. The eye gouge or groin strike, ect hurts of course and may be potentially damaging, but these fighters stop because they are expected to and can. Street level conflict does in fact set a different mindset. One where fighters can indeed continue based on the need and adrenaline.

We've seen how chemical agents can and do alter pain compliance and pain reception in attackers. Heavy drug/ alcohol use on the part of an attacker can render some of these tactics less than effective. What will always remain effective is positional dominance and control of the other individual thru application of leverage.