First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
best method to train for fighting
1355 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Baltimore, MD
Offline
Posted 2/17/09
workout
muscle memmory training drills
punching and kicking punching bags
sparing partner
experience
Posted 2/17/09
Well, I'm not sure about it, but here it goes:
Learn several different techniques and go around the world trying them all out on profesionals. If you want a better challenge, join an army that is sure to send you somewhere thats full of fully trained enemies and try to get into a close combat fight with them via surroundment or take them prisoner and entertain yourself by fighting them, even maybe learn some tactics the enemy uses.
I'm not sure if it'll work or not, it's just a sugestion
572 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / Manila, Tokyo, Me...
Offline
Posted 2/18/09
tournaments? Find a Sifu?
111 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31
Offline
Posted 2/18/09

JJT2 wrote:


hayate87 wrote:

I've trained in martial arts for a very long time and can tell you about pretty much anything, but these are the most important parts for martial artists that plan to fight.

1. Experience: Definitely necessary, you have to spar, there's no way around this! You pretty much listed every type possible, so you have to pick one. I would recommend full contact with padding, but make sure to tell your sparring partner to go at a certain level rather than all out if you are scared of injury. Don't be afraid to tell your partner to go easier or to stop if you are hurt and don't want to continue. If you have no one to spar with, you will probably have to join a class, club, etc. Important: Use gloves and hand wraps or you will your damage your wrist and hands unless you have "tempered" your fist and hands. (Don't be afraid to take a punch)

2. Conditioning: Any kind of cardio exercise is good, especially running and swimming. Also, you should probably lift weights if you can to get some muscle, not only good for strength but also helps nullify the opponents hits. Be consistent, stop for a couple of days and you will break the habit of your exercise routine. If you plan to fight without gloves and padding, kill the nerves on your fists, elbows, knees, shins, and feet. You can do this by hitting anything with a hard surface, (start slowly! you will eventually be able to go full strength.), and you can also constantly roll something like a rolling pin over your feet and shins.

3. Training: Do not stick with one style, train in various styles and take the good parts and incorporate them into your own system. If you want to learn new moves, make sure they are practical, no butterfly kicks! Personally, I recommend taking muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing. I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring.

That's about it, the rest pretty much depends on how consistent you are with your practice. Hope this helps.

PS: I have taken many classes for various styles before, so please, don't assume I'm one sided on this.


im just going to argue with point 3 you made. The first part sounds good, Bruce Lee said the same thing,but on the same token, its not good to be a jack of all trades and a master of none.Bruce Lee also said that he doesnt fear the man that knows 10,000 martial arts, but he does fear a man who practiced one technique 10,000 times. but the whole

"I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring."

is a little one sided and rather ignorant. Focusing on the "combative" aspects of martial arts only, there are no such thing as impracticle styles. Its all about the individual and what works for them. And what nessesarily works in a ring wont nessesarily work in a street fight.

All martial arts r similiar and they r all equal. fighting deals with the individual. The "myth" of all these movie martial arts is that they are truly martial arts. They r cariographed and resemble dancing. So when discussing martial arts, you must never refer to movies as an example. Those r opticle illusions that mimic fighting.

All martial arts at one point in time had a combative purpose and was used in armies. Taekwondo and kung fu styles are no different.Focusing on the combative aspects, they are just as effective as ne other art form, it just depends on the individual and what works best for them.

Its just that ever since the 1960s,some Kung fu and taekwondo was turned into a sport and form of expression rather than combat.Dont be fooled into thinking that is all there is to it. Both can be trained for combat like ne other martial art.Im a black belt in taekwondo and train it as a sport and as a form of expression. I can tell you from experience that the techniques drasticly change from sparring class to XMA class (flips and stuff).

Combative taekwondo and even sporting taekwondo doesnt use all of the crap u see in movies and XMA. Just look at one sparring match.You will only see side kicks and round house kicks. Maybe a few spinning back kicks or spinning hook kicks from the advanced fighters. Never will you see ne one spin more then one time, flip, fly kicking, butter fly kick,cresit kick, or ne thing that wont work in combat.And the moment someone tries it, they get knocked flat on thier ass from a side kick.

I have experience in many other martial arts including "muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing".And i can tell you that the basic kicks,philosophys,and foot work in taekwondo carry over to each of the arts and many more i havn't mensioned above.Although i have no experience in kung fu styles, i bet the same thing apply to them as well. If all you know of taekwondo and kung fu comes from movies, then the only true knowlege you can attest to is knowing u know nothing of either.(based off of Sacrates quote).

Dont mix up the combative aspects with the sporting and expressive aspects.And yes, i do use taekwondo's kicks in combat, as well as muy thai's.So i do know what works in combat "for me" opposed to what might not work at all "for me". peace over war


It may not be good to be a jack of all trades but it's not smart to focus on one, especially not TKD, I don't believe in taking everything as clearly stated when I wrote on practicing impractical styles. I assume you've been taking TKD for a while, I have run into people like this before who can't accept the fact that something they love so much is inferior to other styles. I don't mean to be an asshole, but this is true.

I focus on the combative aspects of martial arts because it's all I care about. I myself have taken kung fu and TKD. TKD has too much focus on kicks, not enough on punching, grappling, or anything else for that matter, and does not teach you how to take a hit.(I have seen many classes, so don't assume I just had a bad one.) Kung fu training is just idiotic, they don't train you to fight, they train to do some strange movements, and an occasional punch or kick is thrown into the mix, whatever they mean to teach, it doesn't work in fights, I have tried it. There are certain styles that only work in certain situations, but the ones I listed do not work for anything other than sport and XMA. I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too.

I use movies as an example because many times people assume that it is realistic and that movies fights are like real fights, and many movies use those style because they teach these moves and people think they look cool. I also guarantee you that they are not as effective as any other style.

All styles are not similar and equal, if that were true there would not be so many different styles in the first place. They have many differences including the way to punch or kick, muay thai uses the shins and turns the hips, and karate uses the foot. I could give a hundred examples of this but would rather you do your research before saying something like that.

I don't mix up the combative and sporting/expressive aspects, i couldn't care less about the latter. I don't even consider myself a martial artist since they take the philosophical parts into account.

Again, I don't mean to be an asshole, but be realistic. I don't know you or if you've actually ever fought or anything, frankly I don't care, but you should know that training to fight is about 90% conditioning. You learn the moves and then you get stronger to hit harder and to last longer.

I don't know anything about Bruce Lee, but I don't care what he said. He was never much a fighter and was more of an actor.
4885 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / next to you
Offline
Posted 2/18/09 , edited 2/18/09
Watch a lot of Jacky Chan and Chuck Norris...i just said chuck taylor..stupid
173 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / London
Offline
Posted 2/18/09
get in to one, and see wut happens----i wouldnt recomend it tho....
22648 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F
Offline
Posted 2/18/09
Play a fighting game and use tha same moves like in Tekken games
4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 2/18/09

hayate87 wrote:


JJT2 wrote:


hayate87 wrote:

I've trained in martial arts for a very long time and can tell you about pretty much anything, but these are the most important parts for martial artists that plan to fight.

1. Experience: Definitely necessary, you have to spar, there's no way around this! You pretty much listed every type possible, so you have to pick one. I would recommend full contact with padding, but make sure to tell your sparring partner to go at a certain level rather than all out if you are scared of injury. Don't be afraid to tell your partner to go easier or to stop if you are hurt and don't want to continue. If you have no one to spar with, you will probably have to join a class, club, etc. Important: Use gloves and hand wraps or you will your damage your wrist and hands unless you have "tempered" your fist and hands. (Don't be afraid to take a punch)

2. Conditioning: Any kind of cardio exercise is good, especially running and swimming. Also, you should probably lift weights if you can to get some muscle, not only good for strength but also helps nullify the opponents hits. Be consistent, stop for a couple of days and you will break the habit of your exercise routine. If you plan to fight without gloves and padding, kill the nerves on your fists, elbows, knees, shins, and feet. You can do this by hitting anything with a hard surface, (start slowly! you will eventually be able to go full strength.), and you can also constantly roll something like a rolling pin over your feet and shins.

3. Training: Do not stick with one style, train in various styles and take the good parts and incorporate them into your own system. If you want to learn new moves, make sure they are practical, no butterfly kicks! Personally, I recommend taking muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing. I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring.

That's about it, the rest pretty much depends on how consistent you are with your practice. Hope this helps.

PS: I have taken many classes for various styles before, so please, don't assume I'm one sided on this.


im just going to argue with point 3 you made. The first part sounds good, Bruce Lee said the same thing,but on the same token, its not good to be a jack of all trades and a master of none.Bruce Lee also said that he doesnt fear the man that knows 10,000 martial arts, but he does fear a man who practiced one technique 10,000 times. but the whole

"I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring."

is a little one sided and rather ignorant. Focusing on the "combative" aspects of martial arts only, there are no such thing as impracticle styles. Its all about the individual and what works for them. And what nessesarily works in a ring wont nessesarily work in a street fight.

All martial arts r similiar and they r all equal. fighting deals with the individual. The "myth" of all these movie martial arts is that they are truly martial arts. They r cariographed and resemble dancing. So when discussing martial arts, you must never refer to movies as an example. Those r opticle illusions that mimic fighting.

All martial arts at one point in time had a combative purpose and was used in armies. Taekwondo and kung fu styles are no different.Focusing on the combative aspects, they are just as effective as ne other art form, it just depends on the individual and what works best for them.

Its just that ever since the 1960s,some Kung fu and taekwondo was turned into a sport and form of expression rather than combat.Dont be fooled into thinking that is all there is to it. Both can be trained for combat like ne other martial art.Im a black belt in taekwondo and train it as a sport and as a form of expression. I can tell you from experience that the techniques drasticly change from sparring class to XMA class (flips and stuff).

Combative taekwondo and even sporting taekwondo doesnt use all of the crap u see in movies and XMA. Just look at one sparring match.You will only see side kicks and round house kicks. Maybe a few spinning back kicks or spinning hook kicks from the advanced fighters. Never will you see ne one spin more then one time, flip, fly kicking, butter fly kick,cresit kick, or ne thing that wont work in combat.And the moment someone tries it, they get knocked flat on thier ass from a side kick.

I have experience in many other martial arts including "muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing".And i can tell you that the basic kicks,philosophys,and foot work in taekwondo carry over to each of the arts and many more i havn't mensioned above.Although i have no experience in kung fu styles, i bet the same thing apply to them as well. If all you know of taekwondo and kung fu comes from movies, then the only true knowlege you can attest to is knowing u know nothing of either.(based off of Sacrates quote).

Dont mix up the combative aspects with the sporting and expressive aspects.And yes, i do use taekwondo's kicks in combat, as well as muy thai's.So i do know what works in combat "for me" opposed to what might not work at all "for me". peace over war


It may not be good to be a jack of all trades but it's not smart to focus on one, especially not TKD, I don't believe in taking everything as clearly stated when I wrote on practicing impractical styles. I assume you've been taking TKD for a while, I have run into people like this before who can't accept the fact that something they love so much is inferior to other styles. I don't mean to be an asshole, but this is true.

I focus on the combative aspects of martial arts because it's all I care about. I myself have taken kung fu and TKD. TKD has too much focus on kicks, not enough on punching, grappling, or anything else for that matter, and does not teach you how to take a hit.(I have seen many classes, so don't assume I just had a bad one.) Kung fu training is just idiotic, they don't train you to fight, they train to do some strange movements, and an occasional punch or kick is thrown into the mix, whatever they mean to teach, it doesn't work in fights, I have tried it. There are certain styles that only work in certain situations, but the ones I listed do not work for anything other than sport and XMA. I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too.

I use movies as an example because many times people assume that it is realistic and that movies fights are like real fights, and many movies use those style because they teach these moves and people think they look cool. I also guarantee you that they are not as effective as any other style.

All styles are not similar and equal, if that were true there would not be so many different styles in the first place. They have many differences including the way to punch or kick, muay thai uses the shins and turns the hips, and karate uses the foot. I could give a hundred examples of this but would rather you do your research before saying something like that.

I don't mix up the combative and sporting/expressive aspects, i couldn't care less about the latter. I don't even consider myself a martial artist since they take the philosophical parts into account.

Again, I don't mean to be an asshole, but be realistic. I don't know you or if you've actually ever fought or anything, frankly I don't care, but you should know that training to fight is about 90% conditioning. You learn the moves and then you get stronger to hit harder and to last longer.

I don't know anything about Bruce Lee, but I don't care what he said. He was never much a fighter and was more of an actor.


It may not be good to be a jack of all trades but it's not smart to focus on one, especially not TKD, I don't believe in taking everything as clearly stated when I wrote on practicing impractical styles. I assume you've been taking TKD for a while, I have run into people like this before who can't accept the fact that something they love so much is inferior to other styles. I don't mean to be an asshole, but this is true.

ok then, dont take my word for it, here is a professional opinion.also for it to be a fact, it must be proven with evidence.

What is the most surperior martial art?

"All of them and none of them. Simply stated: ANY martial art system can be used for self-defense."
"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"

"There are no simple answers. Every martial art style has value."

"And no martial art style or self-defense system will ever be able to teach you everything you need to know about the complexities of violence "

"That 'simple' question is BS because it assumes there's some kind of Wal-mart Supercenter of martial arts. A magical training system/martial art that addresses all of those elements of self-defense. One that not only will allow you to defeat slavering hordes of Uzi carrying ninjas but automatically downloads critical thinking, threat assessment, a perfect understanding of use of force laws, human behavior and the nature of violence directly into your brain...

And all of this by studying one system." -http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm


Here's another opinion from a professional fighter.

"The best fighter is not a boxer, karate, or judo man. The Best fighter is someone who can adapt on any style. He kicks too good for boxer, throws too good for a karate man, and punches too good for a judo man"-Bruce Lee

"When people talk about fighting schools they say that kung fu, or karate, or this others style is the best. That is silly, and the problem becomes that the fighting style then becomes set in stone with no growth, and no adaptation, because what works well with me might not work for you"-Bruce Lee

btw, all of my teachers who i study under tend to aggree. And some of them are also professionals and have been doing martial arts for more then 25 years.

ill talk more about Bruce Lee later.

I focus on the combative aspects of martial arts because it's all I care about. I myself have taken kung fu and TKD. TKD has too much focus on kicks, not enough on punching, grappling, or anything else for that matter, and does not teach you how to take a hit.(I have seen many classes, so don't assume I just had a bad one.) Kung fu training is just idiotic, they don't train you to fight, they train to do some strange movements, and an occasional punch or kick is thrown into the mix, whatever they mean to teach, it doesn't work in fights, I have tried it. There are certain styles that only work in certain situations, but the ones I listed do not work for anything other than sport and XMA. I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too

ok, ask yourself some ?s- where did u take the TKD and what style of kung-fu? who did u take it from? what were u trained in it as? You do know kung-fu refers to all chinese martial arts, so you must have taken at least 90% of them all in china. TKD originated in Korea, so im assuming you took it in Korea as a combative art under professional instructors of course.

Assuming you have been all around these countries and have been to every school and have fought and beat every fighter who takes these arts, how can you be sure it simply just doesnt work for u, and its not the style, but you who cant adapt to it?

it's basic statistics-correalation does not imply causation. Isnt it simply it just didnt work for you? cant that be a variable? How do u know it doesnt work for me? once again, martial arts and fighting all depends on the individual. Mathmaticly its the only thing that makes sense.It's the only thing that can be proven.

Seeing and taking many classes in TKD is a huge difference, and that depends on the instructor and reason for why its being trained.All martial art systems have their limitations. Boxing focuses only on punching as a means of attack, MMA doesnt use guns or weapons.

(btw, my tkd school does teach me how to take hits, but my karate school didnt) and i took both as sports.)

and plz do assume you have been to bad classes, especially in places like the USA. didnt i say it b4?

"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"-http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm

and i have been taking martial arts for 11 years, i have been to the best and worst of schools in both karate and TKD.and i have a black belt in both, so bad schools do exists in the USA, perhaps in other countries to.

As for kung fu, all chinese martial arts- i have never seen or even taken, but i bet the same thing applies.Of course i havnt fought a kung fu guy, but i have to assume you fought them all and learned from them all. So perhaps it just didnt work for you and your just a great fighter. Doesnt mean the art sucks, perhaps your just too good.


There are certain styles that only work in certain situations

no style works in all situations either

I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too
have you taken TKD as a combative art? have you fought with it? sparring is to closely related to sports.im not talking about tKD and kung fu used as sports, im talking about combative style TKD and kung fu.


All styles are not similar and equal, if that were true there would not be so many different styles in the first place. They have many differences including the way to punch or kick, muay thai uses the shins and turns the hips, and karate uses the foot. I could give a hundred examples of this but would rather you do your research before saying something like that.

why are there so many styles then?Because each country created its own fighting style for thier armies to fight with.

“Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch and a kick just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch and a kick no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.” —Bruce Lee

TKD uses the shin and foot depending on the kick. kick boxing to. boxing and muy thai kickboxing have the same punch. karate and tkd punches are similiar. TKD uses hip as a power house to strenghthen kicks as well. So do many kung fu arts.

you can get all nit picky if u want, but a punch is still just a punch, a kick , still just a kick.

research? you dont even know who Bruce Lee was. and i bet you havnt even researched the origin of all martial arts either.i have plenty of sources on the other hand, books, websites, professionals, personal experience, ect.
what r your sources?

I don't know anything about Bruce Lee, but I don't care what he said. He was never much a fighter and was more of an actor

have you fought with him? have you done YOUR research? he considered himself a martial artist first and a actor 2nd. He grew up fighting in the streets. Got into serveral martial arts such as tai chi, wing chun, boxing, ect. He majored in philosophy in college.

When he came to America, he didnt like the way we did martial arts.So he challanged us, kicked everyone's ass and made his own philosophy and martial art.- Jeet kune do. For ever changed the way americans did martial arts. He broke Chinese stereotypes as well.
Chuck Noris and Jackie Chan knew him as well.Chuck said Bruce Lee was the better fighter of the two.

read "toa of Jeet kune do" if u dont believe me. look him up. The book is not some how to do kung fu book, its a philosophy on fighting and gives you a few things about the creation of jeet kune do. Most of my quotes come from the book.

If you knew anything about the reality of fighting, you would know that serperior styles are a fantasy. All martial arts have roots in combat.Its never style vs style, cause that doesnt mean a thing.ever watch MMA? guess whos phiolosphy they take after? who does the president consider the father of MMA? Bruce Lee. Who was in the martial arts hall of fame.

But if u dont think my sources are valid, ask any professional what style is the best. If they say ne thing different then im telling you, then either A. they want your money.

or B. they dont know what they r talking about.
and b is highly unlikly.
peace over war
Posted 2/18/09
punching bag >:3
38425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Maui
Offline
Posted 2/18/09 , edited 2/18/09

JJT2 wrote:


Hedbrant wrote:

the perfect training method is called experience.



but how does one get that experience? and is that experience without consequences?is it without danger?doesnt do to go to go to jail while trying to train yourself. doesnt do to good getting shot/hospitilized while in training either. peace over war


find someone to train with you. Sparring, practice techniques, someone to roll with (hope you know what rolling is). That's what my friends do. Get some mats so you and your partner can train. You can get experience that way. To get the full training you can't just do it by yourself. Having a partner to train with is best.



BubbleUp wrote:

punching bag >:3


sorry but a punching bag doesn't punch back. To train all aspects of fighting you'll need more than just a punching bag.



vladtepesdrac wrote:

MUAY THAI! hahaha i think thats the most effective form of martial arts!


I agree that Muay Thai is a deadly effective art but being well rounded is key to being one of the greatest.




hikobuf wrote:

watch alot of bruce lee,Jet lee,jackie chan and Shu qi action movies


not recommended cause the fighting in movies are different from real life. Try to fight like that in real life and you'd probably get a good ass whoopin, though you might get lucky like that one guy in that one video in youtube. lol.

and while sparring, rolling, and practicing techniques and stuff are great ways to train, don't forget you need to condition yourself too. watch the GSP vs. BJP- their first fight.
4552 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/18/09
I just use a gun.
111 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31
Offline
Posted 2/19/09 , edited 2/19/09

JJT2 wrote:


hayate87 wrote:


JJT2 wrote:


hayate87 wrote:

I've trained in martial arts for a very long time and can tell you about pretty much anything, but these are the most important parts for martial artists that plan to fight.

1. Experience: Definitely necessary, you have to spar, there's no way around this! You pretty much listed every type possible, so you have to pick one. I would recommend full contact with padding, but make sure to tell your sparring partner to go at a certain level rather than all out if you are scared of injury. Don't be afraid to tell your partner to go easier or to stop if you are hurt and don't want to continue. If you have no one to spar with, you will probably have to join a class, club, etc. Important: Use gloves and hand wraps or you will your damage your wrist and hands unless you have "tempered" your fist and hands. (Don't be afraid to take a punch)

2. Conditioning: Any kind of cardio exercise is good, especially running and swimming. Also, you should probably lift weights if you can to get some muscle, not only good for strength but also helps nullify the opponents hits. Be consistent, stop for a couple of days and you will break the habit of your exercise routine. If you plan to fight without gloves and padding, kill the nerves on your fists, elbows, knees, shins, and feet. You can do this by hitting anything with a hard surface, (start slowly! you will eventually be able to go full strength.), and you can also constantly roll something like a rolling pin over your feet and shins.

3. Training: Do not stick with one style, train in various styles and take the good parts and incorporate them into your own system. If you want to learn new moves, make sure they are practical, no butterfly kicks! Personally, I recommend taking muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing. I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring.

That's about it, the rest pretty much depends on how consistent you are with your practice. Hope this helps.

PS: I have taken many classes for various styles before, so please, don't assume I'm one sided on this.


im just going to argue with point 3 you made. The first part sounds good, Bruce Lee said the same thing,but on the same token, its not good to be a jack of all trades and a master of none.Bruce Lee also said that he doesnt fear the man that knows 10,000 martial arts, but he does fear a man who practiced one technique 10,000 times. but the whole

"I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring."

is a little one sided and rather ignorant. Focusing on the "combative" aspects of martial arts only, there are no such thing as impracticle styles. Its all about the individual and what works for them. And what nessesarily works in a ring wont nessesarily work in a street fight.

All martial arts r similiar and they r all equal. fighting deals with the individual. The "myth" of all these movie martial arts is that they are truly martial arts. They r cariographed and resemble dancing. So when discussing martial arts, you must never refer to movies as an example. Those r opticle illusions that mimic fighting.

All martial arts at one point in time had a combative purpose and was used in armies. Taekwondo and kung fu styles are no different.Focusing on the combative aspects, they are just as effective as ne other art form, it just depends on the individual and what works best for them.

Its just that ever since the 1960s,some Kung fu and taekwondo was turned into a sport and form of expression rather than combat.Dont be fooled into thinking that is all there is to it. Both can be trained for combat like ne other martial art.Im a black belt in taekwondo and train it as a sport and as a form of expression. I can tell you from experience that the techniques drasticly change from sparring class to XMA class (flips and stuff).

Combative taekwondo and even sporting taekwondo doesnt use all of the crap u see in movies and XMA. Just look at one sparring match.You will only see side kicks and round house kicks. Maybe a few spinning back kicks or spinning hook kicks from the advanced fighters. Never will you see ne one spin more then one time, flip, fly kicking, butter fly kick,cresit kick, or ne thing that wont work in combat.And the moment someone tries it, they get knocked flat on thier ass from a side kick.

I have experience in many other martial arts including "muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing".And i can tell you that the basic kicks,philosophys,and foot work in taekwondo carry over to each of the arts and many more i havn't mensioned above.Although i have no experience in kung fu styles, i bet the same thing apply to them as well. If all you know of taekwondo and kung fu comes from movies, then the only true knowlege you can attest to is knowing u know nothing of either.(based off of Sacrates quote).

Dont mix up the combative aspects with the sporting and expressive aspects.And yes, i do use taekwondo's kicks in combat, as well as muy thai's.So i do know what works in combat "for me" opposed to what might not work at all "for me". peace over war


It may not be good to be a jack of all trades but it's not smart to focus on one, especially not TKD, I don't believe in taking everything as clearly stated when I wrote on practicing impractical styles. I assume you've been taking TKD for a while, I have run into people like this before who can't accept the fact that something they love so much is inferior to other styles. I don't mean to be an asshole, but this is true.

I focus on the combative aspects of martial arts because it's all I care about. I myself have taken kung fu and TKD. TKD has too much focus on kicks, not enough on punching, grappling, or anything else for that matter, and does not teach you how to take a hit.(I have seen many classes, so don't assume I just had a bad one.) Kung fu training is just idiotic, they don't train you to fight, they train to do some strange movements, and an occasional punch or kick is thrown into the mix, whatever they mean to teach, it doesn't work in fights, I have tried it. There are certain styles that only work in certain situations, but the ones I listed do not work for anything other than sport and XMA. I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too.

I use movies as an example because many times people assume that it is realistic and that movies fights are like real fights, and many movies use those style because they teach these moves and people think they look cool. I also guarantee you that they are not as effective as any other style.

All styles are not similar and equal, if that were true there would not be so many different styles in the first place. They have many differences including the way to punch or kick, muay thai uses the shins and turns the hips, and karate uses the foot. I could give a hundred examples of this but would rather you do your research before saying something like that.

I don't mix up the combative and sporting/expressive aspects, i couldn't care less about the latter. I don't even consider myself a martial artist since they take the philosophical parts into account.

Again, I don't mean to be an asshole, but be realistic. I don't know you or if you've actually ever fought or anything, frankly I don't care, but you should know that training to fight is about 90% conditioning. You learn the moves and then you get stronger to hit harder and to last longer.

I don't know anything about Bruce Lee, but I don't care what he said. He was never much a fighter and was more of an actor.


It may not be good to be a jack of all trades but it's not smart to focus on one, especially not TKD, I don't believe in taking everything as clearly stated when I wrote on practicing impractical styles. I assume you've been taking TKD for a while, I have run into people like this before who can't accept the fact that something they love so much is inferior to other styles. I don't mean to be an asshole, but this is true.

ok then, dont take my word for it, here is a professional opinion.also for it to be a fact, it must be proven with evidence.

What is the most surperior martial art?

"All of them and none of them. Simply stated: ANY martial art system can be used for self-defense."
"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"

"There are no simple answers. Every martial art style has value."

"And no martial art style or self-defense system will ever be able to teach you everything you need to know about the complexities of violence "

"That 'simple' question is BS because it assumes there's some kind of Wal-mart Supercenter of martial arts. A magical training system/martial art that addresses all of those elements of self-defense. One that not only will allow you to defeat slavering hordes of Uzi carrying ninjas but automatically downloads critical thinking, threat assessment, a perfect understanding of use of force laws, human behavior and the nature of violence directly into your brain...

And all of this by studying one system." -http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm


Here's another opinion from a professional fighter.

"The best fighter is not a boxer, karate, or judo man. The Best fighter is someone who can adapt on any style. He kicks too good for boxer, throws too good for a karate man, and punches too good for a judo man"-Bruce Lee

"When people talk about fighting schools they say that kung fu, or karate, or this others style is the best. That is silly, and the problem becomes that the fighting style then becomes set in stone with no growth, and no adaptation, because what works well with me might not work for you"-Bruce Lee

btw, all of my teachers who i study under tend to aggree. And some of them are also professionals and have been doing martial arts for more then 25 years.

ill talk more about Bruce Lee later.

I focus on the combative aspects of martial arts because it's all I care about. I myself have taken kung fu and TKD. TKD has too much focus on kicks, not enough on punching, grappling, or anything else for that matter, and does not teach you how to take a hit.(I have seen many classes, so don't assume I just had a bad one.) Kung fu training is just idiotic, they don't train you to fight, they train to do some strange movements, and an occasional punch or kick is thrown into the mix, whatever they mean to teach, it doesn't work in fights, I have tried it. There are certain styles that only work in certain situations, but the ones I listed do not work for anything other than sport and XMA. I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too

ok, ask yourself some ?s- where did u take the TKD and what style of kung-fu? who did u take it from? what were u trained in it as? You do know kung-fu refers to all chinese martial arts, so you must have taken at least 90% of them all in china. TKD originated in Korea, so im assuming you took it in Korea as a combative art under professional instructors of course.

Assuming you have been all around these countries and have been to every school and have fought and beat every fighter who takes these arts, how can you be sure it simply just doesnt work for u, and its not the style, but you who cant adapt to it?

it's basic statistics-correalation does not imply causation. Isnt it simply it just didnt work for you? cant that be a variable? How do u know it doesnt work for me? once again, martial arts and fighting all depends on the individual. Mathmaticly its the only thing that makes sense.It's the only thing that can be proven.

Seeing and taking many classes in TKD is a huge difference, and that depends on the instructor and reason for why its being trained.All martial art systems have their limitations. Boxing focuses only on punching as a means of attack, MMA doesnt use guns or weapons.

(btw, my tkd school does teach me how to take hits, but my karate school didnt) and i took both as sports.)

and plz do assume you have been to bad classes, especially in places like the USA. didnt i say it b4?

"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"-http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm

and i have been taking martial arts for 11 years, i have been to the best and worst of schools in both karate and TKD.and i have a black belt in both, so bad schools do exists in the USA, perhaps in other countries to.

As for kung fu, all chinese martial arts- i have never seen or even taken, but i bet the same thing applies.Of course i havnt fought a kung fu guy, but i have to assume you fought them all and learned from them all. So perhaps it just didnt work for you and your just a great fighter. Doesnt mean the art sucks, perhaps your just too good.


There are certain styles that only work in certain situations

no style works in all situations either

I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too
have you taken TKD as a combative art? have you fought with it? sparring is to closely related to sports.im not talking about tKD and kung fu used as sports, im talking about combative style TKD and kung fu.


All styles are not similar and equal, if that were true there would not be so many different styles in the first place. They have many differences including the way to punch or kick, muay thai uses the shins and turns the hips, and karate uses the foot. I could give a hundred examples of this but would rather you do your research before saying something like that.

why are there so many styles then?Because each country created its own fighting style for thier armies to fight with.

“Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch and a kick just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch and a kick no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.” —Bruce Lee

TKD uses the shin and foot depending on the kick. kick boxing to. boxing and muy thai kickboxing have the same punch. karate and tkd punches are similiar. TKD uses hip as a power house to strenghthen kicks as well. So do many kung fu arts.

you can get all nit picky if u want, but a punch is still just a punch, a kick , still just a kick.

research? you dont even know who Bruce Lee was. and i bet you havnt even researched the origin of all martial arts either.i have plenty of sources on the other hand, books, websites, professionals, personal experience, ect.
what r your sources?

I don't know anything about Bruce Lee, but I don't care what he said. He was never much a fighter and was more of an actor

have you fought with him? have you done YOUR research? he considered himself a martial artist first and a actor 2nd. He grew up fighting in the streets. Got into serveral martial arts such as tai chi, wing chun, boxing, ect. He majored in philosophy in college.

When he came to America, he didnt like the way we did martial arts.So he challanged us, kicked everyone's ass and made his own philosophy and martial art.- Jeet kune do. For ever changed the way americans did martial arts. He broke Chinese stereotypes as well.
Chuck Noris and Jackie Chan knew him as well.Chuck said Bruce Lee was the better fighter of the two.

read "toa of Jeet kune do" if u dont believe me. look him up. The book is not some how to do kung fu book, its a philosophy on fighting and gives you a few things about the creation of jeet kune do. Most of my quotes come from the book.

If you knew anything about the reality of fighting, you would know that serperior styles are a fantasy. All martial arts have roots in combat.Its never style vs style, cause that doesnt mean a thing.ever watch MMA? guess whos phiolosphy they take after? who does the president consider the father of MMA? Bruce Lee. Who was in the martial arts hall of fame.

But if u dont think my sources are valid, ask any professional what style is the best. If they say ne thing different then im telling you, then either A. they want your money.

or B. they dont know what they r talking about.
and b is highly unlikly.
peace over war


ok then, dont take my word for it, here is a professional opinion.also for it to be a fact, it must be proven with evidence.

What is the most surperior martial art?

"All of them and none of them. Simply stated: ANY martial art system can be used for self-defense."
"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"

"There are no simple answers. Every martial art style has value."

"And no martial art style or self-defense system will ever be able to teach you everything you need to know about the complexities of violence "

"That 'simple' question is BS because it assumes there's some kind of Wal-mart Supercenter of martial arts. A magical training system/martial art that addresses all of those elements of self-defense. One that not only will allow you to defeat slavering hordes of Uzi carrying ninjas but automatically downloads critical thinking, threat assessment, a perfect understanding of use of force laws, human behavior and the nature of violence directly into your brain...

And all of this by studying one system." -http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm


Here's another opinion from a professional fighter.

"The best fighter is not a boxer, karate, or judo man. The Best fighter is someone who can adapt on any style. He kicks too good for boxer, throws too good for a karate man, and punches too good for a judo man"-Bruce Lee

"When people talk about fighting schools they say that kung fu, or karate, or this others style is the best. That is silly, and the problem becomes that the fighting style then becomes set in stone with no growth, and no adaptation, because what works well with me might not work for you"-Bruce Lee

btw, all of my teachers who i study under tend to aggree. And some of them are also professionals and have been doing martial arts for more then 25 years.

ill talk more about Bruce Lee later.


OK? What's your point? Doesn't this agree with what I mentioned earlier?

ok, ask yourself some ?s- where did u take the TKD and what style of kung-fu? who did u take it from? what were u trained in it as? You do know kung-fu refers to all chinese martial arts, so you must have taken at least 90% of them all in china. TKD originated in Korea, so im assuming you took it in Korea as a combative art under professional instructors of course.

Why would I have to take TKD in Korea for it to be as a combative art? or kung fu in China? They do teach it here and I am very picky about the classes I take. Just because I didn't practice in the country of origin doesn't mean I was in a class that doesn't represent it properly or train properly.

Assuming you have been all around these countries and have been to every school and have fought and beat every fighter who takes these arts, how can you be sure it simply just doesnt work for u, and its not the style, but you who cant adapt to it?

There isn't much to adapt to. A style that focuses on high fast kicks and practically no punches offers no defense in any way, even the stance is too ridiculously tiring too ever be used in a serious fight. Roundhouse and spinning kicks rarely work and having a style dedicated to high kicks in general is pretty stupid. There is a reason that it is considered a sport more than a fighting style. I know, it once was used for combative reasons, but not anymore since there are better styles people know about. It does give a good leg workout, i'll give it that, but that's all it's good for.

and plz do assume you have been to bad classes, especially in places like the USA. didnt i say it b4?

Again, too much focus on country of origin. This is probably the most childish reason ever used by people like you who always get so defensive when someone taunts their precious TKD. I used to take it, I got over when I found out it sucked in real fights, why can't you?

and i have been taking martial arts for 11 years, i have been to the best and worst of schools in both karate and TKD.and i have a black belt in both, so bad schools do exists in the USA, perhaps in other countries to.

Black belts aren't worth anything, other than to flaunt that you have been in a style for many years. The style can easily be learned in less than a year if your dedicated. I'm not sure how this proves there are bad schools, but I know there are bad schools, I have seen many classes and there way too many that are just downright stupid not just in their training but in what they promise(anything promised is pretty ridiculous).

As for kung fu, all chinese martial arts- i have never seen or even taken, but i bet the same thing applies.Of course i havnt fought a kung fu guy, but i have to assume you fought them all and learned from them all. So perhaps it just didnt work for you and your just a great fighter. Doesnt mean the art sucks, perhaps your just too good.

There's probably a reasons you haven't fought one. Being either that you don't fight much or either that no one uses it for a reason. I myself have only fought two kung fu guys in a serious fight in my life.

no style works in all situations either

Which is why you need to train in styles that you might actually use. You were against it saying not be a jack of all trades earlier. Doesn't this statement contradict that bruce lee thing about training a single technique 10,000 times except on a wider scale when talking about styles?

you can get all nit picky if u want, but a punch is still just a punch, a kick , still just a kick.

I get nit picky because shin kicks do hurt more than toe or foot kicks, and muay thai kicks do hurt a HELL of a lot more than karate kicks. Kicks are not just kicks, they are done differently for a reason. I doubt you ever fought a decent kickboxer if you believe that load of crap. Sounding philosophical doesn't make you sound any smarter.


research? you dont even know who Bruce Lee was. and i bet you havnt even researched the origin of all martial arts either.i have plenty of sources on the other hand, books, websites, professionals, personal experience, ect.
what r your sources?


I didn't know who Bruce Lee was, but I do know he was some guy made a bunch of overrated movies. I have not researched the origin of martial arts because I couldn't care less about them. I learn ,practice and train to fight, not to follow some dead guys teachings, follow philosophy, or get a history lesson. I don't care what past people have done, I'm sure most of todays pro fighters can easily beat most of yesterdays. My only sources are the internet, some pro's, and what I've seen and experience.


have you fought with him? have you done YOUR research? he considered himself a martial artist first and a actor 2nd. He grew up fighting in the streets. Got into serveral martial arts such as tai chi, wing chun, boxing, ect. He majored in philosophy in college.


I have done some research on him when I was younger, and you do know that most things they said about him were pure myth right? I bet they only wanted to pass him off as the greatest so his movies can sell. I have no way to prove what was real and what wasn't, but neither do you. It is a fact that there were a lot of exaggerations about him tho. (Tai chi is not a fighting style, genius.)


If you knew anything about the reality of fighting, you would know that serperior styles are a fantasy. All martial arts have roots in combat.Its never style vs style, cause that doesnt mean a thing.ever watch MMA? guess whos phiolosphy they take after? who does the president consider the father of MMA? Bruce Lee. Who was in the martial arts hall of fame.


In the case of TKD, it is inferior for the mere fact that it focuses on things rarely used in a real fight, if you focus on things you don't use, you will lose. By the way, Gene Lebell is considered the father of modern MMA, not your precious Bruce Lee.

But if u dont think my sources are valid, ask any professional what style is the best. If they say ne thing different then im telling you, then either A. they want your money.

or B. they dont know what they r talking about.
and b is highly unlikly.


Again, I am very picky about what I train in, I don't waste time or money, considering I don't have much of either. I have no way of knowing if you actually fight or anything for that matter, I can however tell that you are a Bruce Lee fan boy. You should really spend more of your effort involving martial arts into training rather than anything else if you actually want to win fights. I highly doubt you have ever been in a serious fight that was not just a point match,a sparring match, exhibition, ect., or that you've ever been in a street fight. Sadly I have no way of proving any of what I claim either unless you live in Los Angeles and were willing to actually be in a real fight(No gloves, no nothing). I see you care more about martials arts than I do in the way that you research into it. Frankly, I don't care for it, I see as a tool that will make me a better fighter, not as some way of life or something to worship and love. If you want to be a good fighter, conditioning is all that matters, training in the style is the simplest part. No moves are hard to learn unless you have something holding you back like not being able to kick as high or as wide as others which can be easily fixed with stretching the muscles. Clearly, there are differences in the way we think, in the way that you would use martial arts as a way of life and as something you just love and even research about. I on the other hand have learned the moves I deemed useful and pratice them sometimes and spend most of my training time conditioning and building muscle rather than just mindlessly repeating a movement, throwing the same punch, or learning some idiotic kata or something. I wonder which one of us has a better use for the martials arts? It's just up to some opinion, but my way is significantly better if you want to fight and actually win rather than idol other people who did.

(Years you've been training: 11, Years I've been training:20 )
4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 2/19/09 , edited 2/19/09

hayate87 wrote:


JJT2 wrote:


hayate87 wrote:


JJT2 wrote:


hayate87 wrote:

I've trained in martial arts for a very long time and can tell you about pretty much anything, but these are the most important parts for martial artists that plan to fight.

1. Experience: Definitely necessary, you have to spar, there's no way around this! You pretty much listed every type possible, so you have to pick one. I would recommend full contact with padding, but make sure to tell your sparring partner to go at a certain level rather than all out if you are scared of injury. Don't be afraid to tell your partner to go easier or to stop if you are hurt and don't want to continue. If you have no one to spar with, you will probably have to join a class, club, etc. Important: Use gloves and hand wraps or you will your damage your wrist and hands unless you have "tempered" your fist and hands. (Don't be afraid to take a punch)

2. Conditioning: Any kind of cardio exercise is good, especially running and swimming. Also, you should probably lift weights if you can to get some muscle, not only good for strength but also helps nullify the opponents hits. Be consistent, stop for a couple of days and you will break the habit of your exercise routine. If you plan to fight without gloves and padding, kill the nerves on your fists, elbows, knees, shins, and feet. You can do this by hitting anything with a hard surface, (start slowly! you will eventually be able to go full strength.), and you can also constantly roll something like a rolling pin over your feet and shins.

3. Training: Do not stick with one style, train in various styles and take the good parts and incorporate them into your own system. If you want to learn new moves, make sure they are practical, no butterfly kicks! Personally, I recommend taking muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing. I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring.

That's about it, the rest pretty much depends on how consistent you are with your practice. Hope this helps.

PS: I have taken many classes for various styles before, so please, don't assume I'm one sided on this.


im just going to argue with point 3 you made. The first part sounds good, Bruce Lee said the same thing,but on the same token, its not good to be a jack of all trades and a master of none.Bruce Lee also said that he doesnt fear the man that knows 10,000 martial arts, but he does fear a man who practiced one technique 10,000 times. but the whole

"I also recommend you not take anything impractical styles like tae kwon do, kung fu, or pretty much any style that looks like it belongs in a movie rather than in a street fight or a ring."

is a little one sided and rather ignorant. Focusing on the "combative" aspects of martial arts only, there are no such thing as impracticle styles. Its all about the individual and what works for them. And what nessesarily works in a ring wont nessesarily work in a street fight.

All martial arts r similiar and they r all equal. fighting deals with the individual. The "myth" of all these movie martial arts is that they are truly martial arts. They r cariographed and resemble dancing. So when discussing martial arts, you must never refer to movies as an example. Those r opticle illusions that mimic fighting.

All martial arts at one point in time had a combative purpose and was used in armies. Taekwondo and kung fu styles are no different.Focusing on the combative aspects, they are just as effective as ne other art form, it just depends on the individual and what works best for them.

Its just that ever since the 1960s,some Kung fu and taekwondo was turned into a sport and form of expression rather than combat.Dont be fooled into thinking that is all there is to it. Both can be trained for combat like ne other martial art.Im a black belt in taekwondo and train it as a sport and as a form of expression. I can tell you from experience that the techniques drasticly change from sparring class to XMA class (flips and stuff).

Combative taekwondo and even sporting taekwondo doesnt use all of the crap u see in movies and XMA. Just look at one sparring match.You will only see side kicks and round house kicks. Maybe a few spinning back kicks or spinning hook kicks from the advanced fighters. Never will you see ne one spin more then one time, flip, fly kicking, butter fly kick,cresit kick, or ne thing that wont work in combat.And the moment someone tries it, they get knocked flat on thier ass from a side kick.

I have experience in many other martial arts including "muay thai, some karate, brazilian jiujitsu, and boxing".And i can tell you that the basic kicks,philosophys,and foot work in taekwondo carry over to each of the arts and many more i havn't mensioned above.Although i have no experience in kung fu styles, i bet the same thing apply to them as well. If all you know of taekwondo and kung fu comes from movies, then the only true knowlege you can attest to is knowing u know nothing of either.(based off of Sacrates quote).

Dont mix up the combative aspects with the sporting and expressive aspects.And yes, i do use taekwondo's kicks in combat, as well as muy thai's.So i do know what works in combat "for me" opposed to what might not work at all "for me". peace over war


It may not be good to be a jack of all trades but it's not smart to focus on one, especially not TKD, I don't believe in taking everything as clearly stated when I wrote on practicing impractical styles. I assume you've been taking TKD for a while, I have run into people like this before who can't accept the fact that something they love so much is inferior to other styles. I don't mean to be an asshole, but this is true.

I focus on the combative aspects of martial arts because it's all I care about. I myself have taken kung fu and TKD. TKD has too much focus on kicks, not enough on punching, grappling, or anything else for that matter, and does not teach you how to take a hit.(I have seen many classes, so don't assume I just had a bad one.) Kung fu training is just idiotic, they don't train you to fight, they train to do some strange movements, and an occasional punch or kick is thrown into the mix, whatever they mean to teach, it doesn't work in fights, I have tried it. There are certain styles that only work in certain situations, but the ones I listed do not work for anything other than sport and XMA. I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too.

I use movies as an example because many times people assume that it is realistic and that movies fights are like real fights, and many movies use those style because they teach these moves and people think they look cool. I also guarantee you that they are not as effective as any other style.

All styles are not similar and equal, if that were true there would not be so many different styles in the first place. They have many differences including the way to punch or kick, muay thai uses the shins and turns the hips, and karate uses the foot. I could give a hundred examples of this but would rather you do your research before saying something like that.

I don't mix up the combative and sporting/expressive aspects, i couldn't care less about the latter. I don't even consider myself a martial artist since they take the philosophical parts into account.

Again, I don't mean to be an asshole, but be realistic. I don't know you or if you've actually ever fought or anything, frankly I don't care, but you should know that training to fight is about 90% conditioning. You learn the moves and then you get stronger to hit harder and to last longer.

I don't know anything about Bruce Lee, but I don't care what he said. He was never much a fighter and was more of an actor.


It may not be good to be a jack of all trades but it's not smart to focus on one, especially not TKD, I don't believe in taking everything as clearly stated when I wrote on practicing impractical styles. I assume you've been taking TKD for a while, I have run into people like this before who can't accept the fact that something they love so much is inferior to other styles. I don't mean to be an asshole, but this is true.

ok then, dont take my word for it, here is a professional opinion.also for it to be a fact, it must be proven with evidence.

What is the most surperior martial art?

"All of them and none of them. Simply stated: ANY martial art system can be used for self-defense."
"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"

"There are no simple answers. Every martial art style has value."

"And no martial art style or self-defense system will ever be able to teach you everything you need to know about the complexities of violence "

"That 'simple' question is BS because it assumes there's some kind of Wal-mart Supercenter of martial arts. A magical training system/martial art that addresses all of those elements of self-defense. One that not only will allow you to defeat slavering hordes of Uzi carrying ninjas but automatically downloads critical thinking, threat assessment, a perfect understanding of use of force laws, human behavior and the nature of violence directly into your brain...

And all of this by studying one system." -http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm


Here's another opinion from a professional fighter.

"The best fighter is not a boxer, karate, or judo man. The Best fighter is someone who can adapt on any style. He kicks too good for boxer, throws too good for a karate man, and punches too good for a judo man"-Bruce Lee

"When people talk about fighting schools they say that kung fu, or karate, or this others style is the best. That is silly, and the problem becomes that the fighting style then becomes set in stone with no growth, and no adaptation, because what works well with me might not work for you"-Bruce Lee

btw, all of my teachers who i study under tend to aggree. And some of them are also professionals and have been doing martial arts for more then 25 years.

ill talk more about Bruce Lee later.

I focus on the combative aspects of martial arts because it's all I care about. I myself have taken kung fu and TKD. TKD has too much focus on kicks, not enough on punching, grappling, or anything else for that matter, and does not teach you how to take a hit.(I have seen many classes, so don't assume I just had a bad one.) Kung fu training is just idiotic, they don't train you to fight, they train to do some strange movements, and an occasional punch or kick is thrown into the mix, whatever they mean to teach, it doesn't work in fights, I have tried it. There are certain styles that only work in certain situations, but the ones I listed do not work for anything other than sport and XMA. I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too

ok, ask yourself some ?s- where did u take the TKD and what style of kung-fu? who did u take it from? what were u trained in it as? You do know kung-fu refers to all chinese martial arts, so you must have taken at least 90% of them all in china. TKD originated in Korea, so im assuming you took it in Korea as a combative art under professional instructors of course.

Assuming you have been all around these countries and have been to every school and have fought and beat every fighter who takes these arts, how can you be sure it simply just doesnt work for u, and its not the style, but you who cant adapt to it?

it's basic statistics-correalation does not imply causation. Isnt it simply it just didnt work for you? cant that be a variable? How do u know it doesnt work for me? once again, martial arts and fighting all depends on the individual. Mathmaticly its the only thing that makes sense.It's the only thing that can be proven.

Seeing and taking many classes in TKD is a huge difference, and that depends on the instructor and reason for why its being trained.All martial art systems have their limitations. Boxing focuses only on punching as a means of attack, MMA doesnt use guns or weapons.

(btw, my tkd school does teach me how to take hits, but my karate school didnt) and i took both as sports.)

and plz do assume you have been to bad classes, especially in places like the USA. didnt i say it b4?

"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"-http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm

and i have been taking martial arts for 11 years, i have been to the best and worst of schools in both karate and TKD.and i have a black belt in both, so bad schools do exists in the USA, perhaps in other countries to.

As for kung fu, all chinese martial arts- i have never seen or even taken, but i bet the same thing applies.Of course i havnt fought a kung fu guy, but i have to assume you fought them all and learned from them all. So perhaps it just didnt work for you and your just a great fighter. Doesnt mean the art sucks, perhaps your just too good.


There are certain styles that only work in certain situations

no style works in all situations either

I have sparred using TKD, it's only effective when your opponent is using TKD too
have you taken TKD as a combative art? have you fought with it? sparring is to closely related to sports.im not talking about tKD and kung fu used as sports, im talking about combative style TKD and kung fu.


All styles are not similar and equal, if that were true there would not be so many different styles in the first place. They have many differences including the way to punch or kick, muay thai uses the shins and turns the hips, and karate uses the foot. I could give a hundred examples of this but would rather you do your research before saying something like that.

why are there so many styles then?Because each country created its own fighting style for thier armies to fight with.

“Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch and a kick just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch and a kick no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.” —Bruce Lee

TKD uses the shin and foot depending on the kick. kick boxing to. boxing and muy thai kickboxing have the same punch. karate and tkd punches are similiar. TKD uses hip as a power house to strenghthen kicks as well. So do many kung fu arts.

you can get all nit picky if u want, but a punch is still just a punch, a kick , still just a kick.

research? you dont even know who Bruce Lee was. and i bet you havnt even researched the origin of all martial arts either.i have plenty of sources on the other hand, books, websites, professionals, personal experience, ect.
what r your sources?

I don't know anything about Bruce Lee, but I don't care what he said. He was never much a fighter and was more of an actor

have you fought with him? have you done YOUR research? he considered himself a martial artist first and a actor 2nd. He grew up fighting in the streets. Got into serveral martial arts such as tai chi, wing chun, boxing, ect. He majored in philosophy in college.

When he came to America, he didnt like the way we did martial arts.So he challanged us, kicked everyone's ass and made his own philosophy and martial art.- Jeet kune do. For ever changed the way americans did martial arts. He broke Chinese stereotypes as well.
Chuck Noris and Jackie Chan knew him as well.Chuck said Bruce Lee was the better fighter of the two.

read "toa of Jeet kune do" if u dont believe me. look him up. The book is not some how to do kung fu book, its a philosophy on fighting and gives you a few things about the creation of jeet kune do. Most of my quotes come from the book.

If you knew anything about the reality of fighting, you would know that serperior styles are a fantasy. All martial arts have roots in combat.Its never style vs style, cause that doesnt mean a thing.ever watch MMA? guess whos phiolosphy they take after? who does the president consider the father of MMA? Bruce Lee. Who was in the martial arts hall of fame.

But if u dont think my sources are valid, ask any professional what style is the best. If they say ne thing different then im telling you, then either A. they want your money.

or B. they dont know what they r talking about.
and b is highly unlikly.
peace over war


ok then, dont take my word for it, here is a professional opinion.also for it to be a fact, it must be proven with evidence.

What is the most surperior martial art?

"All of them and none of them. Simply stated: ANY martial art system can be used for self-defense."
"Most commercialized systems tend to fall apart, however, when you attempt to fight using them"

"There are no simple answers. Every martial art style has value."

"And no martial art style or self-defense system will ever be able to teach you everything you need to know about the complexities of violence "

"That 'simple' question is BS because it assumes there's some kind of Wal-mart Supercenter of martial arts. A magical training system/martial art that addresses all of those elements of self-defense. One that not only will allow you to defeat slavering hordes of Uzi carrying ninjas but automatically downloads critical thinking, threat assessment, a perfect understanding of use of force laws, human behavior and the nature of violence directly into your brain...

And all of this by studying one system." -http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bestMA.htm


Here's another opinion from a professional fighter.

"The best fighter is not a boxer, karate, or judo man. The Best fighter is someone who can adapt on any style. He kicks too good for boxer, throws too good for a karate man, and punches too good for a judo man"-Bruce Lee

"When people talk about fighting schools they say that kung fu, or karate, or this others style is the best. That is silly, and the problem becomes that the fighting style then becomes set in stone with no growth, and no adaptation, because what works well with me might not work for you"-Bruce Lee

btw, all of my teachers who i study under tend to aggree. And some of them are also professionals and have been doing martial arts for more then 25 years.

ill talk more about Bruce Lee later.


OK? What's your point? Doesn't this agree with what I mentioned earlier?

ok, ask yourself some ?s- where did u take the TKD and what style of kung-fu? who did u take it from? what were u trained in it as? You do know kung-fu refers to all chinese martial arts, so you must have taken at least 90% of them all in china. TKD originated in Korea, so im assuming you took it in Korea as a combative art under professional instructors of course.

Why would I have to take TKD in Korea for it to be as a combative art? or kung fu in China? They do teach it here and I am very picky about the classes I take. Just because I didn't practice in the country of origin doesn't mean I was in a class that doesn't represent it properly or train properly.

Assuming you have been all around these countries and have been to every school and have fought and beat every fighter who takes these arts, how can you be sure it simply just doesnt work for u, and its not the style, but you who cant adapt to it?

There isn't much to adapt to. A style that focuses on high fast kicks and practically no punches offers no defense in any way, even the stance is too ridiculously tiring too ever be used in a serious fight. Roundhouse and spinning kicks rarely work and having a style dedicated to high kicks in general is pretty stupid. There is a reason that it is considered a sport more than a fighting style. I know, it once was used for combative reasons, but not anymore since there are better styles people know about. It does give a good leg workout, i'll give it that, but that's all it's good for.

and plz do assume you have been to bad classes, especially in places like the USA. didnt i say it b4?

Again, too much focus on country of origin. This is probably the most childish reason ever used by people like you who always get so defensive when someone taunts their precious TKD. I used to take it, I got over when I found out it sucked in real fights, why can't you?

and i have been taking martial arts for 11 years, i have been to the best and worst of schools in both karate and TKD.and i have a black belt in both, so bad schools do exists in the USA, perhaps in other countries to.

Black belts aren't worth anything, other than to flaunt that you have been in a style for many years. The style can easily be learned in less than a year if your dedicated. I'm not sure how this proves there are bad schools, but I know there are bad schools, I have seen many classes and there way too many that are just downright stupid not just in their training but in what they promise(anything promised is pretty ridiculous).

As for kung fu, all chinese martial arts- i have never seen or even taken, but i bet the same thing applies.Of course i havnt fought a kung fu guy, but i have to assume you fought them all and learned from them all. So perhaps it just didnt work for you and your just a great fighter. Doesnt mean the art sucks, perhaps your just too good.

There's probably a reasons you haven't fought one. Being either that you don't fight much or either that no one uses it for a reason. I myself have only fought two kung fu guys in a serious fight in my life.
no style works in all situations either

Which is why you need to train in styles that you might actually use. You were against it saying not be a jack of all trades earlier. Doesn't this statement contradict that bruce lee thing about training a single technique 10,000 times except on a wider scale when talking about styles?

you can get all nit picky if u want, but a punch is still just a punch, a kick , still just a kick.

I get nit picky because shin kicks do hurt more than toe or foot kicks, and muay thai kicks do hurt a HELL of a lot more than karate kicks. Kicks are not just kicks, they are done differently for a reason. I doubt you ever fought a decent kickboxer if you believe that load of crap. Sounding philosophical doesn't make you sound any smarter.


research? you dont even know who Bruce Lee was. and i bet you havnt even researched the origin of all martial arts either.i have plenty of sources on the other hand, books, websites, professionals, personal experience, ect.
what r your sources?


I didn't know who Bruce Lee was, but I do know he was some guy made a bunch of overrated movies. I have not researched the origin of martial arts because I couldn't care less about them. I learn ,practice and train to fight, not to follow some dead guys teachings, follow philosophy, or get a history lesson. I don't care what past people have done, I'm sure most of todays pro fighters can easily beat most of yesterdays. My only sources are the internet, some pro's, and what I've seen and experience.


have you fought with him? have you done YOUR research? he considered himself a martial artist first and a actor 2nd. He grew up fighting in the streets. Got into serveral martial arts such as tai chi, wing chun, boxing, ect. He majored in philosophy in college.


I have done some research on him when I was younger, and you do know that most things they said about him were pure myth right? I bet they only wanted to pass him off as the greatest so his movies can sell. I have no way to prove what was real and what wasn't, but neither do you. It is a fact that there were a lot of exaggerations about him tho. (Tai chi is not a fighting style, genius.)


If you knew anything about the reality of fighting, you would know that serperior styles are a fantasy. All martial arts have roots in combat.Its never style vs style, cause that doesnt mean a thing.ever watch MMA? guess whos phiolosphy they take after? who does the president consider the father of MMA? Bruce Lee. Who was in the martial arts hall of fame.


In the case of TKD, it is inferior for the mere fact that it focuses on things rarely used in a real fight, if you focus on things you don't use, you will lose. By the way, Gene Lebell is considered the father of modern MMA, not your precious Bruce Lee.

But if u dont think my sources are valid, ask any professional what style is the best. If they say ne thing different then im telling you, then either A. they want your money.

or B. they dont know what they r talking about.
and b is highly unlikly.


Again, I am very picky about what I train in, I don't waste time or money, considering I don't have much of either. I have no way of knowing if you actually fight or anything for that matter, I can however tell that you are a Bruce Lee fan boy. You should really spend more of your effort involving martial arts into training rather than anything else if you actually want to win fights. I highly doubt you have ever been in a serious fight that was not just a point match,a sparring match, exhibition, ect., or that you've ever been in a street fight. Sadly I have no way of proving any of what I claim either unless you live in Los Angeles and were willing to actually be in a real fight(No gloves, no nothing). I see you care more about martials arts than I do in the way that you research into it. Frankly, I don't care for it, I see as a tool that will make me a better fighter, not as some way of life or something to worship and love. If you want to be a good fighter, conditioning is all that matters, training in the style is the simplest part. No moves are hard to learn unless you have something holding you back like not being able to kick as high or as wide as others which can be easily fixed with stretching the muscles. Clearly, there are differences in the way we think, in the way that you would use martial arts as a way of life and as something you just love and even research about. I on the other hand have learned the moves I deemed useful and pratice them sometimes and spend most of my training time conditioning and building muscle rather than just mindlessly repeating a movement, throwing the same punch, or learning some idiotic kata or something. I wonder which one of us has a better use for the martials arts? It's just up to some opinion, but my way is significantly better if you want to fight and actually win rather than idol other people who did.

(Years you've been training: 11, Years I've been training:20 )


Why would I have to take TKD in Korea for it to be as a combative art? or kung fu in China? They do teach it here and I am very picky about the classes I take. Just because I didn't practice in the country of origin doesn't mean I was in a class that doesn't represent it properly or train properly.

doesnt answer my quesion- did u take it as a combative art? and TKD "might" be taught differently in other other countries that arnt as commercialized as America.maybe.

There isn't much to adapt to. A style that focuses on high fast kicks and practically no punches offers no defense in any way, even the stance is too ridiculously tiring too ever be used in a serious fight. Roundhouse and spinning kicks rarely work and having a style dedicated to high kicks in general is pretty stupid. There is a reason that it is considered a sport more than a fighting style. I know, it once was used for combative reasons, but not anymore since there are better styles people know about. It does give a good leg workout, i'll give it that, but that's all it's good for.

TKD doesnt have a standardized stance in fighting, you choose the stance....and doesnt muy thai have a roundhouse kick?btw, you have been doing MA for 20 yrs, you can adapt to any thing, but not a begginer in martial arts.

also i would advise you to be careful when talking about what works and what doesnt. Fighting is an individual thing, it differs from person to person. What might not work for you, may work for others and vice versa.

I have seen and heard about to many people claiming to be the masters of this and that talking and chanlanging other masters about what "really works".

Example #1 in my jujitsu class, a guy stood up and told the teacher jujitsu doesnt work. The teacher said prove it, so the student and the teacher got in a fight. Student was unconscienous in 5 mins.

Example #2- in the same class a 45 yr old "master" said kicks dont work. So he chalanged the teacher and said "kick me". So the teacher did a spinning hook kick. The "master" just ducked and covered and said "front kick, front kick!"

Example #3- guy walks in my MA club, claims power comes from the shoulder and not the hips.left the club with a dislocated shoulder when he tried to prove his "theory". The muy thai guys had a ball with him.

All im saying is "What might not work for you, may work for others and vice versa".Trying to establish absolutes in martial arts is impossible, so dont try to argue them.

Im not here to argue about the weaknesses of taekwondo, all styles have them, im not denying that. Im not here talking about sport taekwondo. Im talking about combative taekwondo, we dont know if it is still being practiced or not. Maybe somewhere in the mountains of North Korea, it still may be secretly being taught. Like real ninjutsu is in Japan.I havnt taken it, but all im saying is the possibility exists that it may be effective in combat (hence, why its combative).And if the sport version wasnt so commercialized and americanized, it too could be used in combat.

its all about quality vs quanity.

I got over when I found out it sucked in real fights, why can't you?

just because it doesnt work for you, doesnt mean it doesnt work for me. You have yet to prove ne of these so called "facts" with ne evidence. All you have so far is opinion.And i know you havnt interviewed every TKD student and master and asked thier opinion.


Black belts aren't worth anything, other than to flaunt that you have been in a style for many years. The style can easily be learned in less than a year if your dedicated. I'm not sure how this proves there are bad schools, but I know there are bad schools, I have seen many classes and there way too many that are just downright stupid not just in their training but in what they promise(anything promised is pretty ridiculous).

What style? im afraid memorizing techniques, learning techniques, mastering techniques, and actually applying them to fights takes a life time for ne style. Im not sure what you mean by "learned", but learning techniques/styles doesnt help you in a fight. You need much more including the three steps you mensioned in your very first comment.

There's probably a reasons you haven't fought one. Being either that you don't fight much or either that no one uses it for a reason. I myself have only fought two kung fu guys in a serious fight in my life.
no, i dont fight a lot, and i havnt been to china where kung fu is practiced most.So you still havnt proved a thing.

and only fighting 2 guys, you arnt in a much better position then me to be judging what you know so little about.



Which is why you need to train in styles that you might actually use. You were against it saying not be a jack of all trades earlier. Doesn't this statement contradict that bruce lee thing about training a single technique 10,000 times except on a wider scale when talking about styles?

I never said i was against being a jack of all trades and a master of none. nor am i agasint mastering just one art. I believe in doing what is best for the individual. Do what works best for you. I have never tried to say which method is "surperior", but both do have strenghts and weaknesses, like everything in this world. And no, it doesnt contridict. Bruce Lee believed in being good in one thing opposed to being bad in all things...on the other hand Jeet kune do had punching, kicking, grappling , and trapping in it...and he did say he was agaisnt limitations...um.... ....u know what, i dont know what Bruce lee would say in this situation, just do what works best for you

I get nit picky because shin kicks do hurt more than toe or foot kicks, and muay thai kicks do hurt a HELL of a lot more than karate kicks. Kicks are not just kicks, they are done differently for a reason. I doubt you ever fought a decent kickboxer if you believe that load of crap. Sounding philosophical doesn't make you sound any smarter.

and still a kick is still a kick. you used the work kick 7 times in that paragraph.i still dont see how a kick can still be something more then just a kick... if it isnt a kick, why call it a kick?

does sounding philosophical at least make me sound cool?

I have no way to prove what was real and what wasn't, but neither do you. It is a fact that there were a lot of exaggerations about him tho. (Tai chi is not a fighting style, genius.)

hey, i got a lot of the stuff from him on a book he wrote. Im just refering to his philosophy, not his fighting style or skill, never seen him fought, never fought agasint him. I cant talk about what i dont know.
Tai chi has its origins in combat. they just slowed it down and covered it all up in "codes" and "ki". same thing with caperera, a style that mimiced a dance.

In the case of TKD, it is inferior for the mere fact that it focuses on things rarely used in a real fight, if you focus on things you don't use, you will lose.

thats the same as calling an art serperior. TKD focuses on things YOU rarely use in a real fight. How can you tell me what i use in a real fight if u havnt fought me or even met me?How can you tell me what does and doesnt work for me? How can u tell me what fights im going to lose b4 i get in them?
I can very well use my wrists and fingers to fight primarily. I could have won 100s of fights using my wrists and fingers in place of my fists.You cant prove i dont. Because a lot of kung fu styles teach to attack with fingers and wrists. And having only fought 2 kung fu guys, you dont have the knowlege to attest wether or not it works for "them".
The problem with trying to force your "serperiority thoerys" as facts on "everyone" else is that they cant be proven. No scientific studies or test will ever reveal a so called "serperior" martial art or a inferior one.It cant be done. So in a way it's like a religion, based on faith, not fact. or rather based on the individual.

You should really spend more of your effort involving martial arts into training rather than anything else if you actually want to win fights.

i happen to also be a college student with a job preparing to go to the marines, so i do what i can

I wonder which one of us has a better use for the martials arts? It's just up to some opinion, but my way is significantly better if you want to fight and actually win rather than idol other people who did.

You assume im some martial arts fan boy who has never taken a martial arts class in my life. You assume i have never been in a fight and never taken martial arts as a combative style. You assume i cant tell the difference. Well lisen, im not here to give you a biography about me, but i will tell u i do train in martial arts as a combative art and other things. i have been in fights.Im even going to the marines to even further my combative skills and fighting experience.

All im trying to say is fighting/martial arts rest with the individual. fighting depends on the individual, not some style. You asume what works for you will work for everyone in the world. If that were true, why arn't you some type of intructor sharing your omnipotent knowlege about fighting?

Everything you say is right, just for the wrong reasons.(You tend to follow more of Bruce Lee's teaching then you realise- he to was a combative martial artist, maybe if u learn about him more, you may find that you two think very similiar.)

Your way, your thoughts, your training, works best for "you". It may not work as well for the guy who might just want to carry a gun around and wont need all of the conditioning/fighting skills.Or for the guy who doesnt want to fight at all.

All of these personal pronouns you keep using simply proves that what works for you, might not work for others.
Ever take jujitsu or some form of grappling? those martial arts are build off of that philosophy.



You may have had twice as many years in training as i have, but they r your experiences, i learned nothing from them.I wasnt there. I have only my own experiences to go on. Once again, more evidence to point toward fighting depends on the individual. peace over war
Posted 2/19/09
Hm...I first wear down the person (usually by a chase), then pounce on them and scratch them until they can't fight anymore. And bite. X3
111 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31
Offline
Posted 2/20/09


doesnt answer my quesion- did u take it as a combative art? and TKD "might" be taught differently in other other countries that arnt as commercialized as America.maybe.

Not really since I took it when i was a kid, but when I looked for a new class, they were all the same. It doesn't matter what I trained for anyway, I got a look at the combative side and it was the same except they spar, and it's only adults.

TKD doesnt have a standardized stance in fighting, you choose the stance....and doesnt muy thai have a roundhouse kick?btw, you have been doing MA for 20 yrs, you can adapt to any thing, but not a begginer in martial arts.

There may be no "official" stance, but most TKD people just hop around and keeps their hands down. Muay thai may have roundhouse kicks, but it is definitely not the main focus of the style, unlike TKD. I have no idea what you're trying to point out in the last sentence.

also i would advise you to be careful when talking about what works and what doesnt. Fighting is an individual thing, it differs from person to person. What might not work for you, may work for others and vice versa.


Is that why most MMA fighters win using mostly the same styles?

Example #1 in my jujitsu class, a guy stood up and told the teacher jujitsu doesnt work. The teacher said prove it, so the student and the teacher got in a fight. Student was unconscienous in 5 mins.

Details would make it more believable, it sounds like a example a kid would use.


Example #2- in the same class a 45 yr old "master" said kicks dont work. So he chalanged the teacher and said "kick me". So the teacher did a spinning hook kick. The "master" just ducked and covered and said "front kick, front kick!"


So the "master" proved that the kick can be easily avoided? or what?


Example #3- guy walks in my MA club, claims power comes from the shoulder and not the hips.left the club with a dislocated shoulder when he tried to prove his "theory". The muy thai guys had a ball with him.

Again, I don't understand what you're trying to point out. How can the muay thai guys "have a ball" with him if muay thai uses punches that use the shoulder, not the hips. You're not really using any good examples, none of them prove anything, except that you may be desperate to prove something that's not true. More and more I get the idea that you're not a fighter, rather just some little nerdy guy who wants to act like bruce lee and craves attention.


Im not here to argue about the weaknesses of taekwondo, all styles have them, im not denying that. Im not here talking about sport taekwondo. Im talking about combative taekwondo, we dont know if it is still being practiced or not. Maybe somewhere in the mountains of North Korea, it still may be secretly being taught. Like real ninjutsu is in Japan.I havnt taken it, but all im saying is the possibility exists that it may be effective in combat (hence, why its combative).And if the sport version wasnt so commercialized and americanized, it too could be used in combat.


Dude, honestly, TKD is TKD. The way you use it is another story. To train the combative one, you just spar and train a different way, it's not different style. Laughed my ass off at whole mountains of North Korea thing. Ninjutsu isn't being taught because it isn't a fighting style, it's basically training to be a ninja. Ninja are gone and are useless now, therefore we don't need them. If ninjutsu was an actual fighting style I'm sure it would still be taught. There are more styles that commercialized other than TKD, especially now that MMA is so popular.

its all about quality vs quanity.

How does your previous paragraph give the impression of this at all? This phrase doesn't really apply to MA either. As long as you do decent training, it's actually quantity over quality.


just because it doesnt work for you, doesnt mean it doesnt work for me. You have yet to prove ne of these so called "facts" with ne evidence. All you have so far is opinion.And i know you havnt interviewed every TKD student and master and asked thier opinion.


I've fought a hundreds of people and can see what works and what doesn't through simply seeing what hits me and what doesn't. You probably wouldn't know this since you already mentioned you don't fight much.

What style? im afraid memorizing techniques, learning techniques, mastering techniques, and actually applying them to fights takes a life time for ne style. Im not sure what you mean by "learned", but learning techniques/styles doesnt help you in a fight. You need much more including the three steps you mensioned in your very first comment.

Boxing, muay thai, BJJ, and karate. they all took me less than a year to get perfect. It doesn't take a lifetime either, they just want your money. Techniques/styles may be the one the least important parts, but you can't be a good fighter without learning a bunch with todays fighters, knowing how to attack or defend in ways one style may not train in. (example: BJJ with punching or muay thai with anything involving the ground, or TKD with anything other than kicks.)

no, i dont fight a lot, and i havnt been to china where kung fu is practiced most.So you still havnt proved a thing.

and only fighting 2 guys, you arnt in a much better position then me to be judging what you know so little about.


Two serious fights, I didn't mention sparring matches or any other kind. I trained in kung-fu, left and looked for a better class and found they were all the same thing. It's more for show than for fighting.


I never said i was against being a jack of all trades and a master of none. nor am i agasint mastering just one art. I believe in doing what is best for the individual. Do what works best for you. I have never tried to say which method is "surperior", but both do have strenghts and weaknesses, like everything in this world. And no, it doesnt contridict. Bruce Lee believed in being good in one thing opposed to being bad in all things...on the other hand Jeet kune do had punching, kicking, grappling , and trapping in it...and he did say he was agaisnt limitations...um.... Image ....u know what, i dont know what Bruce lee would say in this situation, just do what works best for you Image


Just scroll up to your first or second reply and you'll see it. Bruce Lee just pointed out the obvious, I bet the only people who liked him were people who didn't know anything about MA and thought he looked cool on the movies. (Just saw Fist of Fury to see if I can get a better impression of him, movie sucked and the fighting was pretty cheesy, especially the part were he lifts the rickshaw and flings it half across the street to a wall.)


and still a kick is still a kick. Image you used the work kick 7 times in that paragraph.i still dont see how a kick can still be something more then just a kick... Image if it isnt a kick, why call it a kick? Image

does sounding philosophical at least make me sound cool? Image


A kick may be a kick but classifying all kicks as just kicks is idiotic for the reason I gave earlier. You should know this being a TKD practitioner. Sounding philosophical just gives more of the impression that you're just a Bruce Lee nerd.


hey, i got a lot of the stuff from him on a book he wrote. Im just refering to his philosophy, not his fighting style or skill, never seen him fought, never fought agasint him. I cant talk about what i dont know.
Tai chi has its origins in combat. they just slowed it down and covered it all up in "codes" and "ki". same thing with caperera, a style that mimiced a dance.


Philosophy doesn't have a place in fighting. Tai chi may or may not, I don't know, but even if did, it doesn't now. Capoeira is one the most idiotic styles ever, it would never work against a different style, too tiring and the attacks are just ridiculous.


thats the same as calling an art serperior. TKD focuses on things YOU rarely use in a real fight. How can you tell me what i use in a real fight if u havnt fought me or even met me?How can you tell me what does and doesnt work for me? How can u tell me what fights im going to lose b4 i get in them?
I can very well use my wrists and fingers to fight primarily. I could have won 100s of fights using my wrists and fingers in place of my fists.You cant prove i dont. Because a lot of kung fu styles teach to attack with fingers and wrists. And having only fought 2 kung fu guys, you dont have the knowlege to attest wether or not it works for "them".
The problem with trying to force your "serperiority thoerys" as facts on "everyone" else is that they cant be proven. No scientific studies or test will ever reveal a so called "serperior" martial art or a inferior one.It cant be done. So in a way it's like a religion, based on faith, not fact. or rather based on the individual. Image


I'm not the only one that rarely uses them, all my past opponents rarely used them. You may use them in fights, but you probably only fight either TKD's or people who don't know how to fight, otherwise you'd lose. Saying you can beat people with your fingers and wrists has to be one the funniest things I've ever heard, you'd probably just break them both. You also kinda prove that kung fu sucks by saying this. I've sparred with a lot of kung fu guys and they do use it if it's in their class and they don't know other styles. It's a huge possibility that the people I fought knew kung fu but didn't use it because they know it doesn't work. You have no say in this whatsoever since you haven't even taken a class, or fight someone using it.

i happen to also be a college student with a job preparing to go to the marines, so i do what i can Image

I happen to also be a college student with a job. What I meant is that you should put down your Bruce Lee books and start training in something that works.

All im trying to say is fighting/martial arts rest with the individual. fighting depends on the individual, not some style. You asume what works for you will work for everyone in the world. If that were true, why arn't you some type of intructor sharing your omnipotent knowlege about fighting?

I help people occasionally, otherwise I really don't give a shit.

Everything you say is right, just for the wrong reasons.(You tend to follow more of Bruce Lee's teaching then you realise- he to was a combative martial artist, maybe if u learn about him more, you may find that you two think very similiar.)

Just because Bruce Lee's teachings are too obvious too anyone who takes it serious. I've only read one book about swordmanship and never about hand to hand.

Your way, your thoughts, your training, works best for "you". It may not work as well for the guy who might just want to carry a gun around and wont need all of the conditioning/fighting skills.Or for the guy who doesnt want to fight at all.

They aren't fighters and aren't my concern. If someone comes at me with a gun, I will probably lose but I will try to win, I might get lucky.

All of these personal pronouns you keep using simply proves that what works for you, might not work for others.
Ever take jujitsu or some form of grappling? those martial arts are build off of that philosophy.


It may be built off philosophy, but it can be used for fighting and it's all I care about. I never took jiujitsu since i prefer BJJ.


You may have had twice as many years in training as i have, but they r your experiences, i learned nothing from them.I wasnt there. I have only my own experiences to go on. Once again, more evidence to point toward fighting depends on the individual. peace over war Image


The fact that I have twice the years should be enough for you to realize that I have been doing this for a long time, I don't base what I tell you on what I prefer, it is from what I have seen, experienced, and deduced out of the fights I've had. I tell you these things work because I have tried them or have had someone try it on me and it didn't do much. Fighting may be individual thing to some degree, but there's a reason pro fighters mostly use the styles, because they work. I read some of your recent threads and can't tell if your joking or not, I assume your not.(Claiming you caught a bullet was pretty ridiculous.) But they show you know very little, you need to fight people who know different styles to know what works against what, and what doesn't. Earlier you mentioned you don't fight much, then clearly you don't know much. Actual fights are the most important part to realizing what is useful. Seeing as how you haven't had many, then it's obvious you can't tell what works too much. Also, asking about martial arts in crunchyroll in general shows how little you know, go to a forum dedicated to this kind of stuff and see what they have to say. I guarantee they will laugh at what you have to say. I was hoping this argument would be a bit enlightening, maybe it could change my views a bit from what you would say, but you're just a stubborn person who can't accept that certain things you obsess with are just no good. When you have anywhere near the experience I have, then I will care for what your argument is, but right now you're still learning, and not much since you refuse to accept the facts. Maybe someday you will fight a decent fighter who know something other than TKD and realize just how badly it sucks as a combative art. Till then, I don't see how what you have to say matters.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.