jiu-jitsu, wing chun, shotokan, and krav maga

[Tibby]

Battlefield Combat and street combat are 2 very different things. Just because it was made for a battle field, doesn’t mean it is better by any means. As for strike and joint locks, we do plenty of those in my class, and as far as I know, it is a modern style... Now, as lower ranking person, I know what you mean about "oint manipulation stuff doesn't work in a real situation" because I can't get it to work. But the Blue belts can do it peice of cake. It sounds like most of the big complaint you hear come from while belts, or the students of McDojo's. Who knows.

[Treebranch]

I hear it from people in general, but that's OK if they believe that. It doesn't bother me. We have 19 fists in Budo Taijutsu which is basically Old Jujutsu with Ninjutsu. I never studied any modern Jujitsu so I can't really tell you how much striking they do. Of coure I know that battlefield Combat (Pre-1800's Japan) is very different to Street Combat, but the techniques can easily be adapted for the street. It just takes a little adjustment here and there. This stuff can be brutal or gentle, it's up to you. One of the schools we learn was a bodyguard school and teaches us Hojojutsu, capturing and restraining someone. They teach you how to tie someone up and control them without hurting them too much. These techniques are great, you can do them with your belt, telephone cord, whatever.

 

So I don't understand, if something was made for the battlefield wouldn't that mean it was the most effecient way to disable someone in the shortest amount of time, with a minimal amount of force. I thnk that makes it effective in any situation including the street. Now, where it lacks is the ring. It was certainly not designed for that purpose.

 

Unless you bring back gladiator matches. What kind of Jujitsu do you study?

[Drunken Monkey]

i don't think battle field techniques are neccessarily the most efficient way.

 

if you look at modern methods, they appear to be techniques that could be taught and learnt quickly.

 

after all, what army wants to spend ten years to train their soldiers then watch them die?

 

it sounds a bit harsh but it is often better to teach them simple, quick to learn techniques that may or may not be the most effective.

 

and true war battle fields of old are a very specific fighting ground, the idea of which was just to kill the opposing army, with an army beside you.

 

lets look at the most effective, efficient army ever in history, the romans. as an army, they were virtually undefeatable but how good were they as individuals?

[Treebranch]

You know I'm not talking about today's battlefield right. OK now that's out of the way. There was nothing basic about fighting back in those days, you had to be well trained. If you live through your first battle then you live to learn more techniques and the better you became. The better trained soldier survived longer, that's how it was. Whether it was to fight as one or by yourself, it really depended on the situation. The Romans were a great force, they knew how to fight as one. That doesn't mean they weren't well trained individuals. They had a martial art that was very effective, but unfortunately it was lost. Any close range fighting in those days was done face to face with your enemy. You had to know how to fight with or without a weapon. You know people dropped their weapons during fighting and had to fight unarmed sometimes to survive. I would say even if other men are around you fighting with you, it is much more difficult than a one on one fight. You in a sense are fighting multiple opponents to the death, what could be harder than that. These training methods are totally underestimated today.

[Drunken Monkey]

well, the roman way of warfare was actually quite simple, you fight the guy is in front of you to your left.

 

that way, your shield is held in front of you constantly while the guy NEXT to you stabs him for you.

 

well, my point was, in a real war scenario, how much time do you really have to use complex movements when you have three of four guys trying to stick their swords in you?

 

i am not in anyway belittling your art, rather i am asking a few questions that have always run around my head.

 

whenever i hear someone say that their art is the original battle field tested martial art i am always a little suspicious about it. maybe not suspicious but i think you understand what i mean.

 

i go back to my favourite analogy; cars.

 

formula one drivers are among the best in the world but if you drive like that on the road, it doesn't work.

 

the same goes for rally drivers. amazing drivers but you can't do that in a F1 race.

 

so i ask again, just because it was good for war does mean it is automatically efficient/effective.

[Treebranch]

Well I'd say race car driver, don't drive safe and if they drove like that on the street they'd kill someone, themselves. They in a sense drive on a course, much like a sport MA. Now a trained street driver, lke the kind of training police and FBI get in more practical for the street.

 

Fighting is fighting, unlike cars we as a species have not evolved since homosapien sprung up. We are physically and mentally the same animal. Our anatomy is the same as it's been for thousands of years. So that being said if it works, it works. In my opinion the battlefield was the harshest and best test for techniques. After 900 years of refinement I have to assume that these techniques will work. I've tried a few in a real situation and they do work. I disagree that they are complex moves, they are quite natural. The whole basis of this art is to teach you simple to complex in order to refine and keep refining. If you practice and train this stuff and try to get the techniques perfect, then your margin of error in a real situation will be smaller and smaller as you improve. The Godai are very basic techniques, that are taught that embody the essence of this art. The Godai are pretty easy to learn and anyone can do this. This art doesn't require one to be an athlete and requires very little strength to make it work. It's a about manipulated the attackers balance and taking advantage of their force and using it against them. In a sense it's not complex once you understand it.

[Tibby]

What kind of Jujitsu do you study?

 

Danoshen. My Master Studied under a Korean Master with, along with Judo, and Tea Kwon Do, And American Karate(what a joke) and he was a Deputy Sheriff. It is a "modern" style, but quite effective.

[Drunken Monkey]

ok fair enough, i must admit, i strongly agree that if it's lasted this long then it must work.

 

but i still have doubts on whether

 

battle field=effective...

 

i am not saying that any art that developed for battle field is not effective, just questioning whether JUST BECAUSE it was developed on a battle field, does that automatically make it effective.

 

hope you understand what i mean.

 

and back to the cars.

 

i made a point of bringing rally drivers into it as well because they too are among the best drivers in the world and their style is dramatically different.

[Treebranch]

I totally see where you are coming from FTGU.

 

Tibby Danoshen Jujitsu? I'm going to check it out, sounds cool.