Martial Arts

[Devyn]

Read the PDF of the FM 3-25.150 that I posted earlier. It lays out the most effective blood chokes to use.

Thanks. I have to rely on my wrestling and striking moves (I don't claim to be a fighter, but self defense is important) so I figured that it would help to learn more. I know absolutely zero about chokes. I don't want to hurt anyone, but I want to know how to choke someone if the need arises. I'll probably read that PDF front to back.

Edit: Also, I'd like to add that my instructors always told me that martial artists lose to common men because they don't have faith in their technique. While I believe that many martial arts institutions rely to heavily on 'artsy' things like forms and patterns (and end up going in unpractical directions), there are guys that still prove that martial arts (yes, even the ones besides jujitsu) can be quite effective.

Here's an example:

[MasterSenshi]

Yeah, I quoted the wrong post. I was taking issue with this comment.

The prevelent MMA style, GJJ with a supplemental striking art is not just a practical self defense art, it's the best self defense art.

Perhaps if I had Minions that would be pertinent to know...

But I don't.

srsly thgh, thanks for the link. I'll read into it when I have some time.

[Flare4War]

Thanks. I have to rely on my wrestling and striking moves (I don't claim to be a fighter, but self defense is important) so I figured that it would help to learn more. I know absolutely zero about chokes. I don't want to hurt anyone, but I want to know how to choke someone if the need arises. I'll probably read that PDF front to back.

Edit: Also, I'd like to add that my instructors always told me that martial artists lose to common men because they don't have faith in their technique. While I believe that many martial arts institutions rely to heavily on 'artsy' things like forms and patterns (and end up going in unpractical directions), there are guys that still prove that martial arts (yes, even the ones besides jujitsu) can be quite effective.

Here's an example:

Damness... Where did he strike that guy? was that in the neck or the head. Either way, it did the job.

[DragonFireKai]

Damness... Where did he strike that guy? was that in the neck or the head. Either way, it did the job.

Could be either. Disorientation is more prevelent with the knockout reflex, when the head gets twisted a few degrees farther than it's supposed to. But a good shot to the carotid artery could have similar results.

[KiroiKiri]

I didn't know there were so many martial artists on this site. Pretty cool. I've done Shotokan, Yoseikan Budo Aikido, Capoeira, Jiu-Jitsu, and a bit of Kali and Wing Chun. Has anyone practiced a more obscure style like traditional Muy Thai (the old stuff that still has forms) or Silat or Savate?

[I-n-j-i-n]

I think a majority of black belts and similarly seasoned fighters would disagree. If you learn techniques which are meant to end a fight in one shot, that's incredibly advantageous. Every second you spend in actual combat is another second for you to fuck up or for your opponent simply to catch a lucky break. If you can take a lot of punches, good for you, but it really doesn't take much to incapacitate another human being. A quick fight prevents that from happening (or else is the result).

I mean look at it from a practical point of view though: Does all fights give a fighter that one perfect chance to do the perfect finishing move on them? That perfect punch? That perfect kick? That perfect grapple? That's not very realistic as it is for preparing for a longer fight. THAT goes from a realistic point of view (that not all fights ends up pretty and wrapped up) to the ideal of ending fights. I don't think it's very sound logic to go from the ideal up to the practical.

To me, a well practiced punch is good as any technique to ending a fight as long as you know what you're doing. I think too many traditional styled martial artists underestimate the defense potential of free fighting.

Anyway, people brought up self defense and MMA. First off, I think MMA is great as entertainment but (and no offense to anyone who likes this or does this) it isn't actually related to Martial Arts nor practical self defense. A Martial Art needs to have philosophies and other non-martial aspects to it, otherwise it's just a fighting style. Also, learning to take hits and doing ground work isn't condusive to keeping yourself safe in the common self defense situation, which is most usually against multiple (possibly armed) assailants. Fact of the matter is a boxer can give and receive hits like no other because that's what they're trained to do, but a boxer's reactions aren't gonna keep him any more alive against a few street thugs with knives - the same concept is applicable to MMA fighters and most sports Martial Artists. I-N-J-I-N made the comment "I'd choose a fighter who is built to stand for a longer fight than someone who is in it to finish quickly": maybe that's true if you're betting who'll win an MMA match, but if you're talking self defense I don't have any idea how you came to that conclusion since everything I've learned is contrary to this. If you're outnumbered you don't have time to play with one guy till you've landed that perfect KO punch, since as you're dealing with him his buddies have already ventilated your kidney - in real life opponents don't line up and take turns. Joint manipulations/breaks, quick strikes to vital/pressure points, and many times throws based on using the opponent's own attacking energy to destabilize himself can be used in real situations to bring down an attacker fast without investing much time in them, and a major component of this is getting off the line of opponent's attack. You also need to have the proper reaction - your techniques or strikes down to muscle memory and applied properly according to what the situation dictates, since everyone knows you don't have time to rationalize everything in real life and there's no one technique that will work in all or even most situations.

You're making a laundry list of arguments against MMA that just sound really, really biased. For one, just about all MMA matches apparently don't even go off the second round, some of them not even going past the opening moments. Also, if you do catch a good kick or a punch, against an untrained assailant (assuming that not all thugs are martial arts experts), not to mention the grappling moves that are designed to end the fight then and there, it all ends very quickly anyway. I think it's more a matter of conditioning for a lengthier fight rather than pinning hopes on a single move at a time like what many self defense places teach. Specific techniques can work and all, but I really don't think you can pin your livelihood on techniques rather than the instinctual, conditioned moves you can put into repertoire.

Also, just because you condition for a longer fight doesn't mean that you will HAVE to be in a longer fight. To the contrary. If you're basically trained to be a fighter, the quicker a fight will end. I disagree with some fairytale notion that only techniques can properly finish fights. I can't help but disagree.

[1337 1]

I find it amusing that ever since Naruto came out, there are more places claiming to teach "ninjitsu" (What, no genjutsu or taijutsu? )(BELIEVE IT!!!)(Please don't hurt me )

I do Chung Do Kwan Tae Kwon Do (its the original style, as taught by General Choi.) The classes are fairly old school, but you learn some awesome stuff. Why bother with 1000 flying, spinning backflip kicks, when a simple strike to the carotid artery will knock them out instantly?

[Flare4War]

I mean look at it from a practical point of view though: Does all fights give a fighter that one perfect chance to do the perfect finishing move on them? That perfect punch? That perfect kick? That perfect grapple? That's not very realistic as it is for preparing for a longer fight. THAT goes from a realistic point of view (that not all fights ends up pretty and wrapped up) to the ideal of ending fights. I don't think it's very sound logic to go from the ideal up to the practical.

To me, a well practiced punch is good as any technique to ending a fight as long as you know what you're doing. I think too many traditional styled martial artists underestimate the defense potential of free fighting.

But did you watch Megadave's youtube link? That seemed like "That perfect punch" to me.

p.s. Injin this is off topic but the sig you had before this one you have now is far superior. Your new one sicks me out. It's not lady like at all.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Nice video. Didn't notice before. But I think that goes in line with the basic training of the body with muscle memory of rudimentary techniques than following a laundry list to get the same effect. I don't mean to bash either of them though. I still think free fighting styles are just unnecessarily looked down upon sometimes.

PS- The un-ladylike-ness is the point.

[Flare4War]

Actually I agree. I think it's very much overlooked and underrated. I've seen plenty of UFC and WEC fights where the tough farm boy won the trained tactician with brute strength and raw free fighting. Like you said, I wouldn't discredit either of them.

p.s. again - But it's so disgusting.. It's...it's gross.

[I-n-j-i-n]

That, and in a lot of UFC and Pride and stuff like it, stuffing/bother-them-with-clinches type of wrestling is apparently doing way better than Jiu Jitsu now. With a lot of wrestlers just harassing their enemies by clinching, shoving or even run head first into them until they create an opening. Wrestling is very technique oriented too, but that is definitely the rough and tumble type of sport where you concentrate more on muscle memory of positions and balance than thinking it out steps ahead, unlike with something with more steadfast technique like Judo or Tae Kwon Do or something.

PS- It's not poo.

[Schwaltzvald]

...free fighting styles are just unnecessarily looked down upon sometimes...

PS- The un-ladylike-ness is the point.

This is something that must be emphasized, as any practitioner mustn't ever underestimate the potential of an opponent...

also I actually like your new sig, brings me a good laugh

[Chaser-1]

I've always been of the Bruce Lee school of thought that the best fighter is the one that's still standing, regardless of background in martial arts.

Anyways, here's a little but of what I've learned over the years. I started with Jeet Kune Do a loooooooong time ago and did that for about 7 years before I left Singapore. I started young and ended young, so most of the actual techniques have been lost on me. But the philosophies, however, still stick around. For example, the whole "be like water" and "do not think in a fight, react" statements.

Just fairly recently (few years ago), I picked up Iaido, specifically the Muso Shinden Ryu style. For those of you who are unfamiliar with that art, it's the art of drawing the steel sword, the stuff you see in samurai movies and most recently the Last Samurai. It was because of the creativity and flexibility in actions that I learned from JKD that I was able to rise through the ranks fairly quickly. Before I made my most recent move for graduate school, I was of the 1st kyu rank, one below the level of dan rank, which is the master rank (black belt equivalent if you will).

Almost every martial art has a real-life application, so the stick to one style exclusively because of arrogance is foolish. I think we've all come across people like that before. You know, the ones that make the statement that style A is better than style B just because they're doing it. Frankly, it annoys me when I hear that, and I've personally had to, uh, "demonstrate" some weakness in their style. But overall, I just do martial arts to have the, sound mind, confidence, and knowledge that I can, if necessary, at least provide some sort of protection against an assailant.

[Linearity]

Does anybody here practice Kendo? I've been at it for two years. I'm halfway between casual and serious at this point as I try to hammer out a college degree.

[The Pezman]

I mean look at it from a practical point of view though: Does all fights give a fighter that one perfect chance to do the perfect finishing move on them? That perfect punch? That perfect kick? That perfect grapple? That's not very realistic as it is for preparing for a longer fight. THAT goes from a realistic point of view (that not all fights ends up pretty and wrapped up) to the ideal of ending fights. I don't think it's very sound logic to go from the ideal up to the practical.

Don't misunderstand. It's not that any martial artists will go into a fight knowing only one hit KOs. Any fighter should be able to change and react to the situation, whether that means one or a thousand hits to take out their opponent. But in non sport fighting, the first move of a fighter should be to end the fight.

You said you preferred fighters who are built to last versus those who'd end it quickly. To me that seems to be completely against a lot of what martial arts stands for. As my Shotokan black belt friend said, "The best martial artist should never have to fight." They should be able to talk themselves out of any situation. Of course, if the gloves have to come off... then they're a force to be reckoned with.

From my green belt test:

[Fenrir]

Just fairly recently (few years ago), I picked up Iaido, specifically the Muso Shinden Ryu style. For those of you who are unfamiliar with that art, it's the art of drawing the steel sword, the stuff you see in samurai movies and most recently the Last Samurai. It was because of the creativity and flexibility in actions that I learned from JKD that I was able to rise through the ranks fairly quickly. Before I made my most recent move for graduate school, I was of the 1st kyu rank, one below the level of dan rank, which is the master rank (black belt equivalent if you will).

I've been fascinated with Iaido for some time now. I would love to get involved with it, not because I think I can gain something practical by learning how to draw a sword, but because the skills of concentration, fluidity, and precision can carry over into other aspects of my life.

(unrelated)

In truth, I think that engaging in a particular martial art for pure self-defense reasons is missing the point. To take the lessons and principles and exude them in daily activities in life is part of the experience of integrating the art into your very being.

Of course, this doesn't really apply to things like MMA that don't have any particular philosophy.

In reality, I think arguments about which martial art is "better" is an exercise in sophomoric stupidity. The deeper meanings are lost on braggarts and knuckleheads.

[ambient]

Judging a martial art by a few of its practitioners seems like a pretty flawed frame of reference to me.

So having actual fighting experience against people of other disciplines is a flawed frame of reference? Do you have a better one? If so, please, do share!

[Schwaltzvald]

So having actual fighting experience against people of other disciplines is a flawed frame of reference? Do you have a better one? If so, please, do share!

I believe what's really flawed is the word choice as well as clarity behind what he meant. I believe he meant that no martial art can be judged critically based on a few bad. or even good practicioners of said MA; especially by those whom have may not have, or have a different perspective of a particular MA...

Course... I could be wrong...

I think it's just best to say that no matter what, you will use whatever you're very good at. For example, I am best using my fists, but I will use my whole body if I must, be it sparring/gym/dojo practice, or real life situations. I believe the same could be said for all practicioners of any MA...

[Flare4War]

The philosophies behind Jeet Kune Do are the most superior I think as far as winning a fight is concerned. It's the ultimate mixed martial art. The very open minded approach that every style has something to offer no matter how small. Bruce Lee really did purge a lot of techniques and styles to come up with a fighting rhythm that had little or no wasted movement. Everything from American boxing to various sword fighting stances. He study the many many approaches and eliminated the ones that had no true application in a real fight.

National Geographic did a documentary study on several renowned fighting styles that was very interesting. Including ninjitsu. Despite what people may think, once you see what some of the people who claim to practice it can do, you'll conclude it is a very real way of fighting.

The documentary is called 'Fight Science'. I think this group of people would find it very interesting. So if you haven't seen it, download it and watch it.

Sorry, too lazy to provide a link.

[Chaser-1]

I've been fascinated with Iaido for some time now. I would love to get involved with it, not because I think I can gain something practical by learning how to draw a sword, but because the skills of concentration, fluidity, and precision can carry over into other aspects of my life.

You'd be surprised how precise you have to be with that art. Based of some of the katas and sparring sessions with bokens, mere millimeters determine a successful strike (or in real life, life and death). My personal favorite thing to psych out some of my fellow iaidokas was to use a sheathed stance in the middle of an intense spar. It's basically like cocking the hammer on a gun and the reactions when I did that were priceless. It messes with an opponent's distance and timing because they now have no frame of reference to determine my striking distance since the sword was basically "out of play". My sensei took my personal style and used it as a clinic for the following classes after ours. Now that was a thing to be proud of!

[Fenrir]

So having actual fighting experience against people of other disciplines is a flawed frame of reference? Do you have a better one? If so, please, do share!

I'm saying that if you're going to make sweeping generalizations about an entire martial art, you'd better well have sparred with masters from all over the world.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Don't misunderstand. It's not that any martial artists will go into a fight knowing only one hit KOs. Any fighter should be able to change and react to the situation, whether that means one or a thousand hits to take out their opponent. But in non sport fighting, the first move of a fighter should be to end the fight.

You said you preferred fighters who are built to last versus those who'd end it quickly. To me that seems to be completely against a lot of what martial arts stands for. As my Shotokan black belt friend said, "The best martial artist should never have to fight." They should be able to talk themselves out of any situation. Of course, if the gloves have to come off... then they're a force to be reckoned with.

The thing is, I don't care what martial arts 'stands for'. People always say that the point isn't to fight, to avoid conflicts, etc etc. It's basically pretty rhetoric some choose to live by. By 'fights' I don't really mean it in terms of real life conflicts either. It could be for sport, for self empowerment, etc. But you still aim for the fight even if it may never come.

I mean look at it from a purely objective and practical point of view: If you want to train so much to avoid fights, then what's stopping you from just joining some Tai Chi or Yoga class instead? To me, you join Martial Arts to prepare for fights. Even if you don't prepare to fight for real, you prepare your body and mind for a whole another mindset. To me, 'martial artists shouldn't fight' is just unnecessary philosophical addendum. If you like that philosophy, fine. But is it essential? I'd laugh if you say it is.

[RealFolkBlues]

It's been a while since we've had a martial arts thread, and I gotta say this one's pretty good thus far. There's a lot more actual discussion as opposed to the usual grandstanding.

I myself am a 4th gup (advanced green belt) in Tang Soo Do, and will have been practicing open hand with my school for two years this month. I actually started with Kobudo (traditional Okinawan weapons; jo staff, bo staff, boken mainly,) and will have been doing that with the school for three years in April. I've done a year of kenjitsu (actually a smattering of different styles, all one sword though and very little iaido unfortunately)couple months of Capoeira Angola, a bit of Escrima, some Aikido, and a host of other stuff throughout the years.

Our school has a heavy lean towards self defense, even though we practice a lot of traditional stuff as well. Someone here had said they did TKD with the Moo Duk Kwan. You guys do Yul Gok and Chung Mu, right? I just learned Yul Gok a couple of months ago. Tough form. Great exercise.

A couple things to throw in here; Linearity, as I said a second ago, I've done some kenjitsu. Never have had a chance to get on gear and go at it with shinai, but it seems all kinds of awesome. As it stands, I've been missing my weekly swordwork. We only use boken now and again, as of late.

Flare4War; Jeet Kune Do is awesome, for sure, but remember, Bruce Lee himself (who is one of my biggest heroes,) rejected his own style for the "way of no way." More to the point, in the Tao of Jeet Kune Do, he wrote that you should always use anything that's useful, be it from a style or not. Granted, he took a vast amount of useful techniques from other arts, but there's always more to learn, and plenty of places and ways to learn it.

[WesPip]

The philosophies behind Jeet Kune Do are the most superior I think as far as winning a fight is concerned. It's the ultimate mixed martial art. The very open minded approach that every style has something to offer no matter how small. Bruce Lee really did purge a lot of techniques and styles to come up with a fighting rhythm that had little or no wasted movement. Everything from American boxing to various sword fighting stances. He study the many many approaches and eliminated the ones that had no true application in a real fight.

National Geographic did a documentary study on several renowned fighting styles that was very interesting. Including ninjitsu. Despite what people may think, once you see what some of the people who claim to practice it can do, you'll conclude it is a very real way of fighting.

The documentary is called 'Fight Science'. I think this group of people would find it very interesting. So if you haven't seen it, download it and watch it.

Sorry, too lazy to provide a link.

I saw that Fight Science thing. It was pretty nifty.

Kung Fu failed pretty hard though

[Fenrir]

Call the philosophy unnecessary if you want but, call me crazy, there may just be a reason the masters included and practiced it.