Sauzin Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 And I know, that on the original styles, there was only two types of kickYea but they were executed a lot of different ways. I do believe that high kicks are a recent buzz though. There is nearly no mention of them in any historical accounts I have read. Really when you’re talking about older arts the question of effectiveness is just plain ridiculous. Do you think a martial art is going to be practiced for 200 years and not work? You think people know how to fight now days? Try back when there were no guns and fighting was a matter of day to day survival. Things had to work back then too, only back then the ones who practiced things that didn't work died. Likewise there was a much smaller array of non-combat applicable defense systems as a result. Think about it, if it was practiced in the day when your life constantly depended on it, it had to work. What makes people think that a 1000 year old tried and tested way of fighting isn't going to work now? Are people doing new things? Has someone found a new way of punching? Do people come with 3 arms now instead of 2? I don't think so. The only two things that stand between an effective art and one that isn't are a tradition to draw knowledge from and the mind to practice it. The only two things that stand between an effective art and one that isn't are a tradition to draw knowledge from and the mind to practice it.
Metsubushi Posted October 22, 2003 Posted October 22, 2003 HELL YES!! karate is effective i mean what the hell is the point of the ma when its no use in real life. even say the worst martial art would benifet you even a lil but probably more. and if you got karate experts training in real fights like muay thai you would se the muay thai people lose and even without karate people training in real fights they would stil do very well ! their not likeley to get ko in one hit from the thais or ime sure they would put up a good fight even if the ydid lose
Recommended Posts