The body is a compilation of various machines. There are efficient and inefficient machines, with varying levels of efficiency in between. Martial arts utilize this body. So there are efficient and inefficient martial arts, with varying levels in between. So, on a purely mechanical level, there is a most efficient, best martial art that best utilizes structure and physiology of the human machine. Of course, it might not be the best psychologically, i.e. not considered enjoyable to practice. Or maybe there is one that is best in every regard. Why would this not be true?
You’re right. The best martial art tha tuses the body to it’s best advantage and is most effective in all confrontations is…
THE GUN stupid!
It only requires that great human trait to operate: Opposable thumb.
Anything else comes down to training, personality, dedication - THE PERSON NOT THE STYLE!
Sheesh. How many times?
You cannot defeat the Bronze Girls of Shaolin!Apparently one more. No really, I think I’m onto a great realization here, and am just spreading the good word. 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=“-1”>quote:</font><HR>Anything else comes down to training, personality, dedication - THE PERSON NOT THE STYLE!
[/quote]
These are all considered givens.
But human beings are all built slightly differently. Different people will find different styles more efficient.
I am trying to think of a car analogy but cars have different names in different countries :(.
cxxx:::::::::::>
You’re fu(king up my chi
Well, I meant in terms of average human anatomy. And I don’t think basic structure is all that different. Like three arms, collapsible spines, etc. Like the car thing. There may be different models, but all share some key things, like 4 wheels etc. But htere will be key components and concepts found throughout. The real nitty gritty.
Yes, that is true. All cars share similar traits as to all humans (well most humans anyway). However a sports car is capable of doing things an RV can’t, and vice versa. Different cars (and people) are more suited to doing different things.
If you want to talk about averages, then it kind of destroys the question does it not? If it is only the best for the average, then it is not necessarily the best for a good proportion of the population.
I know for sure that I do not fall into the average demographic in Australia as far as physical build goes. In fact, how many people would fall into the class of average as a proportion of the population?
cxxx:::::::::::>
You’re fu(king up my chi
I think that style makes a big difference.
Let me use Formula 1 racing as an example.
The car is the style and the drive is the individual.
Take Schumacher,he is an excellent driver and put him in a car thats slightly less than competitive and he will still perform well.
Now take one of the less experienced drivers and put him in a Maclaren or Ferrari and you have someone that will do well.
But put Schumacher in a Ferrari(very good car) and you have a world champion.
In this senario you see that style and individual are both important.
“You’re Good Kid Real Good,But As Long As I’m Arround You’ll Always Be Second Best See”.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=“-1”>quote:</font><HR> If you want to talk about averages, then it kind of destroys the question does it not? If it is only the best for the average, then it is not necessarily the best for a good proportion of the population.
[/quote]
But the largest population will be the average. I wasn’t thinking in terms of supurb physical fitness. I was thinking more along the lines of basic and broad term generalities of action and reaction. I am not expressing myself accurately. Maybe someone slipped something in my drink?
But you are basing your arguments on pretty inaccurate assumptions i.e. that every human body works exactly the same way. There may be a martial art that is the best for the average human body that is fit and healthy and has no problems. However, by parameterising it that way it is not longer the best martial art - it is only the best martial art for the average human body that is fit and healthy and has not other problems.
But anyway, based on your assumptions, then I guess you could say a given martial art is most suited, and so may be classed as the best. 
cxxx:::::::::::>
You’re fu(king up my chi
seriously i believe that there is no best style but more so deepr styles and shallower styles and the ability that most people have to learn them is different.
If you have someone who can strike pressure points and give him the subsequent system, or someone who is double jointed and powerful make him a wrestler , someone with a lot of power make him a boxer , i dont think its smart to say there is 1 better system just because of pure body mechanics, but if there was i would have to say that wing chun comes close to it because of efficiency , in ny mechanical circumstance we see efficiency , I.e we dont see a ferrari with an 8 litre engine and say wow that pushes 400 bhp we say look at the 1.3 litre mini that pushes 500 bhp. So in terms of efficiency with right training wing chun has direct efficient strikes .
On the other hand if someone can practise something like tai ji and they are good at it , in my eyes its better to go deeper and get more rather than being happy with the easiest method that may have many flaws compared to a more complex method that generate smore power etc etc.
what do bin laden and general custer have in common???
They’re both wondering where the fu(k all of those tomahawks are coming from. - donated by mojo
“Best martial art?”
-
Kung Fu
~K~
“maybe not in combat.. but think of the chicks man, the chicks!” – someone on the subject of back-flips in combat –
It’s not just a matter of bady mechanics, power or efficiency. It is also a matter of will, personality and intent.
Cohmrac Bas
The best martial art is the combination of brazilian jiujitsu and muy thai.
And kung fu is just a joke. It’s not even a martial art. It’s a dancing art. Kung fu guys have been destroyed by BJJ so many times it’s not even funny. Kung fu is great if you are looking for chinese spirituality chi powers that don’t exsist. But if you looking for fighting then BJJ is the way to go.
Brazilian jiujitsu is superior.
Kung Fu Cowboy
Interesting postulation. And it is probably true that one means of delivering punch will make it the strongest linearly and one means will make it the strongest circularly. The problem is this doesn’t take into account the other guy and that’s sort of the point of martial arts.
Just based on biomechanics, my arm is stronger in at some heights than others. What happens when I face attackers of different sizes and the targets change heights? One way of throwing a punch may be the strongest but not the fastest. What if I start delivering the strongest punch and get clocked by the weaker faster punch from my opponent?
Also, the strongest that a 5’4 woman will ever get is not as strong as a 6’2 man training the same way. Should she try? Or should she try to learn things that capitalize on her own strengths? She may not have learned the hardest way possible for her to punch and go toe-to-toe but then again, it still wouldn’t have been hard enough.
And none of this has to do with psychological inclination. I pass to the outside where it’s harder to hit me. Lots of people like the inside where they have more targets.
So I see your point about a pure best way to produce a particular physical result. But that sort of oversimplifies the question beyond belief
Ralek is a joke.
Kung fu is most best style no doubt about it.
“I AM EFFECTIVNESS”
He’s an unfunny joke. SHUT UP, ROLLS!
K. Mark Hoover
what about marital arts? Not just love-making, but I think simply being able to say you’re sorry. Also, being passive all the time is no good… 
Kill Dr. phil
HEY RALEK
CHECK YOUR EMAIL.