The quagmire of the MA sits and simmers somewhere in a molten pot filled with a plethora of ingredients, known as "Styles", to hopefully satisfy even the most skeptical of palates.

No matter the label affixed to any "style", and no matter how one might or might not decorate any said "style" so that it appears inviting, the one question still stands throughout time...Is it effective?

For a name is just a name for adornment sake, but if it's ineffective, then the name of the style and/or the person(s) associated with it, matters not. Either the style and its core technique(s) are effective or it isn't.

However, it's not the "style" that might be ineffective, it's more possible that the "style" and the practitioner aren't compatible.

I believe, to a point, it's both. It's obvious to me that a person with natural athletic gifts and an indomitable spirit will have an increased likely hood of success in whatever it is they do.

The system is important in so much as the skill sets it will impart on the student. If the martial art has poor skill sets, athletic ability can only go so far. Further, if that art's skill sets are better used by one body frame over another, the student may suffer if they are not built for the system. If it depends on strength or mass and the student is small and weak, it may be a poor fit.

So to blame the system is not always fair. To blame the athlete is not always fair. It's really about pairing the right person to the right system.

I'd say it's 80% practitioner and 20% style. Technically speaking, I think that someone can simply get into 100 fights and develop their own style of "street fighting" and be a very effective fighter in their own arena by experience alone without having a definitive "style" they derived their techniques from. Then you can have someone who's as stiff as an 80 year old man trying to practice a grappling martial art like wrestling or jujitsu and get absolutely wrecked every time they try to take the fight to the floor because they simply don't have the range of motion necessary to make the martial art effective. What I do believe is that everyone has their own forte and choosing the martial art that closest resembles what you're good in is a significant portion of being an effective martial artist.

It's also important to look at hwy you're training now and again. If you want to train for combatives, yet spend most of your time in sport based system then no matter how hard you train you won't be effective.

Sometimes it's style selection that's more of a problem then a style.

The most effient style is to have no style

Enough said

What, to flail around inefficiently with no coherent strategy, tactics, or plan?

Doesn't sound very efficient to me.

I'd think it's methodology, rather than practitioner or style, that is important.

Reply to Justicezero

You are saying everytime you go into a fight you have a game plan

Sorry mate I don't think so

Anything is possible

I have done all different martial arts and that has made me very unprictable over the years

Bruce Lee JKD teachings say a empty cup is better than a full one

means rather than having a style you depend on

Depend on your naturall reactions

Belief me mate I have put faith in Karate in early life then done other martial arts now I would be class as a mixed MA.

The best style would be not to have a style

To be Open minded not bias and that is people problems these days to much faith in the MA and not enough on themselves

Along you have the right state of mind, commitment and open minded you are there allready

Belief me you can be fully trained but if you don't have any understanding on why you do your MA to someone with no experience with full understanding on why he does the MA the 2nd guy is better in my opinion

Alot of people would disagree so you probable won't be the first but I'm am open minded thinking anything is possible

You are saying everytime you go into a fight you have a game plan

That is exactly what I am saying. The fact that I have a 'game plan' means that i am far more able to achieve what I need to do than if I were to just start doing random things without any sort of coherent goal or strategy. "oh gee, maybe i'm gonna punch them, no wait now I am going to do a grapple, but I have to do something to change to the right position to do the armbar no wait forget it i'm gonna kick him, but first I have to adjust again because my hips are all closed up and all and oh well wait this is my kid brother maybe I shouldn't have kicked him in the face.."

Successful militaries and sports teams all build around tactical doctrines and plans rather than "okay guys, let's just, uhm, go in there and do some stuff. Blue squad is gonna charge into the thick of things, okay cool. Yellow squad is going to call in an air strike on them. That's cool. You'll hit Blue squad but hey, we're all about the flexibility and freedom here."

rather than having a style you depend on Depend on your naturall reactions

I don't know about you, but the "natural" reaction to being attacked for all humans, apes, and honestly most mammals is to flail, curl up in a ball, scream, defecate, and urinate. I don't think that's a very useful reaction for most modern situations.

The most effient style is to have no style

Enough said

I understand what you're saying. You're talking more in the same sense that Bruce Lee spoke. Take what works for you and move on. If you like elements x and y from karate and elements z and q from kung fu then that's what you should use.

However, you have to be careful. Otherwise, you get people teaching stuff like this:

So it's not to say "no style" rather, your style. The moves that work best for you are the moves you should use.