Icetuete Posted July 20, 2003 Posted July 20, 2003 some stupid question: which styles are regarded as being "combative" and which are not? and why are they more combative than others, because in my opinion, every "martial" art is combative to a certain extend. please forgive me for this stupidness and answer without insults for my questions
telsun Posted July 20, 2003 Posted July 20, 2003 Stupid question? I agree with you that all martial arts are "combative", apart from the Mcdojos. lol I keep asking God what I'm for and he tells me........."gee I'm not sure!"
Kyle-san Posted July 20, 2003 Posted July 20, 2003 Because some have a specific focus on combat, while others... don't.
Icetuete Posted July 20, 2003 Author Posted July 20, 2003 so they focus on what? meditation, philosophy and physical fitness? thats a point. but i think these are what make they art more effective in combat. the understanding and the ability are essential to make an art combative. or do u talk about other emphasises?
Kyle-san Posted July 20, 2003 Posted July 20, 2003 so they focus on what? meditation, philosophy and physical fitness? thats a point. but i think these are what make they art more effective in combat. the understanding and the ability are essential to make an art combative. or do u talk about other emphasises? I agree that there are different paths to effectiveness in combat, however from the perspective of many there are arts that are naturally "combative" and some that aren't. For example, Krav Maga is a good example of a "combative" art, specifically because it was designed for modern security and self-defence forces. Whereas something like Tai Chi isn't what most people think of when the phrase "Combative Martial Arts" comes up. With that being said, though, I'm aware that Tai Chi has several aspects that lead it to combat. It's all a scale based on degrees of usefulness for combat and, generally speaking, is completely subjective.
IAMA_chick Posted July 20, 2003 Posted July 20, 2003 what exactly is a Mcdojo? i have been wondering that for a long time. Tae Kwon Do15-years oldpurple--belt
UsagiYojimbo Posted July 21, 2003 Posted July 21, 2003 Kyle-San, I'm currently taking Shuai Chiao. We learn Tai Chi moves and use their martial applications. So it can be combative, depending on how it is practiced.
JerryLove Posted July 21, 2003 Posted July 21, 2003 so they focus on what? meditation, philosophy and physical fitness? thats a point. but i think these are what make they art more effective in combat. the understanding and the ability are essential to make an art combative. or do u talk about other emphasises?So you think that studying Yoga will make you an accomplished fighter? It's not just an art issue; but also a school issue; and as simple a statement as "combative or not" doesn't really give you a great deal of information. Boxing, Judo, Muay Thai, and BJJ are all sport arts; but also make excellent fighters. Akido, Karate (say Shotokan), and Taiji are combative arts; but because of circumstances such as how they are taught, the nature of their decisions, and /or the general practitioner of these arts; you are unlikey to find particularly good fighters coming out of such schools. https://www.clearsilat.com
martialartist1 Posted July 22, 2003 Posted July 22, 2003 combatative are those that specialise more in fighting like boxing, kickboxing, muay thai, JKD, BJJ, shootfighting e.t.c. basically its like all styles without kata and forms, but just made for fighting.
JerryLove Posted July 22, 2003 Posted July 22, 2003 No, those are sports. Combat-focsed arts include most Sialts, Krav Maga, Systema and typically Jujitsu. https://www.clearsilat.com
Recommended Posts