First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
What is the best fighting technique over all? why?
4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 3/20/09

sevnup wrote:


Pecca wrote:

Maybe one the most effective striking styles, certainly not the single most effective style. MMA can't really be considered a style unto itself because it may draw from any style, one MMA gym may teach completely different moves with different mechanics, and different combinations than another.
True about the striking. I can see Ju-jitsu being up there as well. But what I meant by MMA is that a person trained in more than one style will be a better fighter than a person trained in just one. Say a person with Brazilian Ju-jitsu/Muay Thai training fought a person with just Muay Thai - the second person will not be able to counter the ground fighting the first person will be able to bring on.



fighting is based on the individual, not the style, whether its one style vs 500, the best fighter will simply win. Even if he doesnt have a style...the muy thai fighter without ground techniques may get lucky and knoch the mixed martial artist out before he gets the chance to grapple.Just because you know 500 styles, doesnt mean you will use them all in a single fight. this is not science. Bruce Lee said that he fears the man who practiced one technique 10,000 times, not the man who knows 10,000 martial arts. peace over war
13326 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Terra
Offline
Posted 3/20/09

JJT2 wrote:

What is the best fighting technique over all? what would you consider to be the most useful? why? what are its pros and cons? is it simple? easy to learn? if you could only use one technique in a fight, what would it be?

i personally like the verticle jab from jeet kune do. its fast, non-telegraphic, and it can lead to cool combos and feints.it can have some power to it, but not much. so thats its downside.your thoughts? peace over war


nut cracker against males

public fisting against females

anal upward gun against either gender



those are the best techniques since most people do not train those parts of their body...
12089 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / VA
Offline
Posted 3/20/09
i never said 500 styles, that's excessive. but lets say that two skilled fighters - one trained in two, the other trained in just one were in a fight. who has the advantage if they're both equally skilled? i'm not talking about luck nor science. i'm talking about probability.

1. Fighter A has practiced many times fighting on the ground and standing up.
2. Fighter B has practiced many times fighting standing up.
3. They are both equally good fighters.
4. A gets B on the ground, B doesn't know how to counter a hold.

Posted 3/20/09
lol, flick your opponent on the nose then run like the wind!!! ahahahaha
10694 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 3/20/09
press the red button that says "launch all nukes." also known as the flying finger strike of ultimate doom.
548 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Boston
Offline
Posted 3/20/09 , edited 3/20/09

JJT2 wrote:


sevnup wrote:


Pecca wrote:

Maybe one the most effective striking styles, certainly not the single most effective style. MMA can't really be considered a style unto itself because it may draw from any style, one MMA gym may teach completely different moves with different mechanics, and different combinations than another.
True about the striking. I can see Ju-jitsu being up there as well. But what I meant by MMA is that a person trained in more than one style will be a better fighter than a person trained in just one. Say a person with Brazilian Ju-jitsu/Muay Thai training fought a person with just Muay Thai - the second person will not be able to counter the ground fighting the first person will be able to bring on.



fighting is based on the individual, not the style, whether its one style vs 500, the best fighter will simply win. Even if he doesnt have a style...the muy thai fighter without ground techniques may get lucky and knoch the mixed martial artist out before he gets the chance to grapple.Just because you know 500 styles, doesnt mean you will use them all in a single fight. this is not science. Bruce Lee said that he fears the man who practiced one technique 10,000 times, not the man who knows 10,000 martial arts. peace over war


If you practice punching or kicking in a manner that neither allows you to do significant damage, nor maintain balance, as some styles do. You will not be able to beat someone with a similar amount of experience in a style that does do these things. Go ahead and practice a technique 10,000 times, if it's not an effective technique it still won't be of any use.

Oh and my favorite technique is a simple elbow block
268 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 3/20/09
Kamehameha
Posted 3/20/09
Stabbing them in the face, because it's easy to do and works rather well.
1499 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / somewhere in asia...
Offline
Posted 3/20/09
i agree with the bonta-kun technique NUT CRACKER!!!!!
2460 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / 啊,我在 Lost Underse...
Offline
Posted 3/20/09
I'm pretty sure crying in fettle position because your salty tears will drown your adversaries. Thats the true story behind Noah's flood.
594 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Australia
Offline
Posted 3/21/09
i do vovinam viet martial arts hehe i like the leg techniques
4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 3/23/09

Pecca wrote:


JJT2 wrote:


sevnup wrote:


Pecca wrote:

Maybe one the most effective striking styles, certainly not the single most effective style. MMA can't really be considered a style unto itself because it may draw from any style, one MMA gym may teach completely different moves with different mechanics, and different combinations than another.
True about the striking. I can see Ju-jitsu being up there as well. But what I meant by MMA is that a person trained in more than one style will be a better fighter than a person trained in just one. Say a person with Brazilian Ju-jitsu/Muay Thai training fought a person with just Muay Thai - the second person will not be able to counter the ground fighting the first person will be able to bring on.



fighting is based on the individual, not the style, whether its one style vs 500, the best fighter will simply win. Even if he doesnt have a style...the muy thai fighter without ground techniques may get lucky and knoch the mixed martial artist out before he gets the chance to grapple.Just because you know 500 styles, doesnt mean you will use them all in a single fight. this is not science. Bruce Lee said that he fears the man who practiced one technique 10,000 times, not the man who knows 10,000 martial arts. peace over war


If you practice punching or kicking in a manner that neither allows you to do significant damage, nor maintain balance, as some styles do. You will not be able to beat someone with a similar amount of experience in a style that does do these things. Go ahead and practice a technique 10,000 times, if it's not an effective technique it still won't be of any use.

Oh and my favorite technique is a simple elbow block


another thoery, but a nice counter arguement would be how would u define "significant damage"? and all styles maintain some form balance.Even wushu styles that practice fighting off balance so that when they fight they r always on balance. like drunken boxing.so some styles may appear to be off balance, but thats just a feint. no one can fight off balance.
and what are these styles? and how do they punch and kick? (styles trained combativly only of course).

also, how do u define an "effective technique"? these interpretations define how you view martial arts that diff from yours. peace over war
142
8794 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Sweden
Offline
Posted 3/23/09
The cheapest and most wussy one.
1844 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / In The Abyss
Offline
Posted 3/23/09
Any type of kneeing strike.
548 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Boston
Offline
Posted 3/23/09

JJT2 wrote:

another thoery, but a nice counter arguement would be how would u define "significant damage"? and all styles maintain some form balance.Even wushu styles that practice fighting off balance so that when they fight they r always on balance. like drunken boxing.so some styles may appear to be off balance, but thats just a feint. no one can fight off balance.
and what are these styles? and how do they punch and kick? (styles trained combativly only of course).

also, how do u define an "effective technique"? these interpretations define how you view martial arts that diff from yours. peace over war


Significant damage is kind of self explanatory. I'm not quite sure how you would like me to quantify damage. Plenty of chinese martial arts styles are full of moves that inflict no real damage on an opponent.

Styles like TKD, kung fu, capoeria, etc. are awful in terms of balance when it comes to fighting an actual opponent. They're great when you're just throwing strikes in the air, but actually step into their kicks (front or side) and they fall backwards, catch a kick and it's an easy takedown.

As for that last part I think there are plenty of martial arts that differ from my own that are effective, kyokoshin, shootboxing, sambo, kickboxing, BJJ, judo, boxing (in terms of punching technique), some jujutsu, some san shou, vale tudo, etc. I don't view "different" as ineffective, I view ineffective as ineffective.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.