Treebranch Posted June 30, 2003 Posted June 30, 2003 StoneSkin said: Joe has practiced Karate for 5 years he is 5'7 150lbs. With aproximently 9% body fat. Hes in Fairly good shape. Extremely good at Kata. BillyBob is a farmer he knows no martial arts. BillyBob worked hard on the farm all his life and when he got in trouble he got a bad whoppin. Billybob is 6'8 weighs 345lbs and has about 11% bodyfat. Hes in great shape really strong and has a high tolerance for pain. Now whos gonna win Billybob or Joe ? What you forgot to mention about Joe is that he was a vicious and dirty street brawler before he got to karate. He would use anything and everything to his disposal in a streetfight. Now the lines are getting a little blurrier. Joe knows better than to let this guy get a hold of him so Joe is going to dance around avoiding Billy Bob until Billy Bob gets really tired. Joe has some crazy endurance. So when Billy Bob is exhausted Joe will go in for the kill. "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"
SaiFightsMS Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 That type of comparison is not what this forum is designed to deal with.
Treebranch Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 Style Vs. Style Right? Street Brawler Vs. Karate, aren't those styles? "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"
Martial_Artist Posted July 1, 2003 Author Posted July 1, 2003 Yes, but you have effectively removed any means of continuing the conversation based purely on a technical level. Stating extrenuating circumstance does not help in comparison of styles. Also, the focus of this thread, Art vs Art?!?! isn't about which style is better, you should read the previous threads, but about exposing a sting of logic that constantly finds itself contorted depending on the theme of a thread. Art vs Art?!?! was written to ask the question, if style doesn't matter, then why bother choosing an art, if all it does it falls upon the fighter? Well, obviously that argument cannot hold water. Because why did you choose the style you are taking over karate, tai chi, wing chun, muay thai, or any of the other styles? Because you feel that there are advantages to your art over another. Well, then there must be more to it than simply the fighter. Art must play a role. I really don't like repeating something I already spent time explaing. Really, you could already find discussion concerning your points of interest in the previous posts, and they will be in much greater detail than my simple review. That is the focus of this thread. If style means nothing and it is the fighter, why does it matter what style you choose? This question delves much into the rhetoric of the ancient rhetoricians and was meant to be the catalyst in self-questioning. It really is quite self evident. In fact, it was to some point even resolved. MA. ps. This thread is not about style vs style; about which one is better, but about discovering what underlies the principles concerning art vs art. "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination.Imagination is more important than knowledge.Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Einstein
Kirves Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 A style is something that can be defined to it's technical curriculum and details to a standard. You can define Shotokan karate. You can define Kickboxing. You can define Tai Shin Mun Kungfu. You can not define a street brawler's techincal details with any standard method.
Treebranch Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 Thanks for the education. In reality Art vs. Art can only be discussed if the person discussing or debating the Arts at hand have been studied by the persons in the debate. Therefore, I bet you can find standards in the common untrained street fighter. "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"
Kirves Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 (edited) Therefore, I bet you can find standards in the common untrained street fighter. Okay, let's hear them. First would you start by listing all the techniques that this person is proficient with? Edited August 27, 2003 by Kirves
StoneSkin Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 The point i was trying to make was the physical size of a person determines a large portion of who is going to win in a fight. Now i know your gonna say that is not part of the thread, however I disagree in many martial arts physcial training is a large part of the program. There for it does come down to in the end fighter vs. fighter. The style does play a certain role, however many boxers would say. Every guy has there day, it doesnt matter how hard they trained or how long theyve been training, whether they just didnt feel right or didnt throw the right combinations whatever the reason, eventually everybody loses. So if you were to say which art is better.. it doesnt really matter. If a boxer trained hard every day for 5 years and a tae kwon do practisioner trained hard everyday for 5 years. They would both be equal.
Treebranch Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 Double leg takedown, single leg takedown, overhand left and right, Jabs, kicks to the groin, Wild attack with flurry of punches to head, head butts, straddling person on ground and pound, hair pulling, biting, various chokes, head lock, rear choke, low kicks to legs. These are a few I've seen throughout the years. If you think of any let me know. The goal for me here is not to claim a common Streetfighter is better, but that you can find common techniques among Untrained Common Streetfighters. "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"
StoneSkin Posted July 1, 2003 Posted July 1, 2003 I think most gritty-gym boxer can take the trash out on the majority of contemporary martial artists. They just train at a higher level of intensity. The average martial artist is soft, not very strong, and weighs little. Also, many contemporary martial artists simply do not train as hard, with as much pain, as do most boxers. Hardcore boxers do much to defeat contemporary martial artists.
Recommended Posts