I’ve been considering a few profiles lately and the way people put their arsenal of styles together. I don’t believe that any one art is complete and apparently neither do alot of others.
To cover all bases, 1st what do you think we need
( Ie - / hand/ foot strike/ kata or form( ?) locks/ holds / feet etc
and what styles / forms even are best with which aspects??
Striking/Standing Grappling/Ground Grappling
Striking: Muay Thai or Boxing with Kicking elements
Standing Grappling: (I know Ima catch heat for this one) SHUAI CHIAO!
Ground: Brazillian JuiJutsu…hands down.
But my cup a tea may be someone else’s vingar.
I’m gonna try and get into some Caporiera when I get to MN. (RED5! I KNOW YOU HEAR ME!) That will help me get nimble and flexable…dig?
I think if you like an element of something, don’t let the art discount the true quality of the move/lock/training method/etc.
Originally posted by CaptinPickAxe
[B]Striking/Standing Grappling/Ground Grappling
Striking: Muay Thai or Boxing with Kicking elements
[/B]
well why don’t you just go ahead and call it shaolin…
what sort of boxing and what are we looking for in a kicking component??
Western Boxing with Muay Thai Kicks…not even close to Shaolin…
I don’t think that there are NO styles that are ‘complete’… rather styles focus on certain particulars early on and there’s an expectation of mastery before the martial artist is ‘complete’
So that leads to the notion that, well, it’s most likely because it’s easier to train, focus and master particular aspects at a time and work from there. So really, most styles are taught in a way that focuses on particular aspects at first for the student to train in and acqure a decent degree of mastery before either being taught other aspects or the extensions of what has been already learned to become more ‘complete’.
Perhaps its the notion of being a master of one vs a jack of all…
Also, really, what is the purpose of training in the art in the first place… if it’s to defend yourself, then one doesn’t quite need a ‘complete’ art… rather, one needs basic defense training, neutralization of incoming strikes, avoidance of ‘take downs’, etc… and a regimen to improve fitness to be capable and alert.
If the purpose is to be able to fight, then in addition to the defense, training in ‘attack’ would also be needed. If the purpose is competition, then the training would depend on the rules of competition, and so on…
So really, how do you define ‘complete’?
Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
[B]I don’t think that there are NO styles that are ‘complete’…
So really, how do you define ‘complete’? [/B]
name one!!??
by complete I mean all aspects covered …I hate those “define” questions because then you get into absolutes etc
if you look at the original question , like I said, what do
you think a style needs to be covered in all bases and in which are you finding them??
CPA: I don’t want to troll on your choices before everyone else has posted, but western boxing ha??
san shou is damn near complete. Minus the whole ground thing.
Originally posted by CaptinPickAxe
[ near complete. [/B]
Captnpickaxe, you let me know when you get up hear and I’ll introduce you to the class!
Yep, I think a well rounded martial artist needs to address all ranges. I believe he also needs to focus on his strengths. If you can strike well, meaning quickly and powerfully, then focus on that but don’t neglect the grappling aspects either.
I’ve personally found that quite a few arts address alot of the aspects of fighting, but I’ve never seen one that addresses all of them effectively.
Here’s something-
Is it better to actively seek out techniques from various styles and train in all of them, or to pick a style and focus on the mastery of that style?
Say 3 decades of intense, rigorous and dedicated training… Which would be better?
I’m thinking again, it depends on what you’re into…
It seems like there are good styles out there that claim well rounded combat capability at high levels… but you’ve gotta get through the training to get to that level… or so the claims.
Then there’s the jeet kune doish/MMAish philosophy of grabbing what can be learned quickly and intensley training in those techniques rather than full styles, per se…
Originally posted by blooming lotus
[B]well why don’t you just go ahead and call it shaolin…
[/B]
ummm… maybe because it’s not?
Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
[B]Here’s something-
Is it better to actively seek out techniques from various styles and train in all of them, or to pick a style and focus on the mastery of that style?
Say 3 decades of intense, rigorous and dedicated training… Which would be better?
I’m thinking again, it depends on what you’re into…
It seems like there are good styles out there that claim well rounded combat capability at high levels… but you’ve gotta get through the training to get to that level… or so the claims.
Then there’s the jeet kune doish/MMAish philosophy of grabbing what can be learned quickly and intensley training in those techniques rather than full styles, per se… [/B]
That’s not really the mma philosophy. standing, grappling. that’s it. could be wrestling and boxing, MT and bjj, boxing and catch, etc. It’s not as…ecclectic as jkd tends to be.
Hey BL, didn’t you used to talk about how complete ninjutsu was?
Muay Thai/BJJ
Is it better to actively seek out techniques from various styles and train in all of them, or to pick a style and focus on the mastery of that style?
Depends on your goals and it also depends on the art. Does the art itself accomplish everything you need? If so, I say focus on that. If you’re looking for more of something your art doesn’t have then go elsewhere for it.
There’s nothing wrong with either approach, not inherently, but if your goal is to be a good all aorund fighter, and your art only focuses on striking, then your deluding yourself if you think your getting good al around skill.
Originally posted by IronFist
Muay Thai/BJJ
Yeah, that does me a lot of good if I get attacked by some punk with a 50-lb Kwan Dao and all I have is my long spear!
Originally posted by SevenStar
Originally posted by blooming lotus
well why don’t you just go ahead and call it shaolin…
ummm… maybe because it’s not?
So? I don’t get the problem.
Originally posted by MasterKiller
Yeah, that does me a lot of good if I get attacked by some punk with a 50-lb Kwan Dao and all I have is my long spear!
Silly me. How could I forget that scenario?! :eek: 
Originally posted by SevenStar
Hey BL, didn’t you used to talk about how complete ninjutsu was?
no, I spoke about how effective it was.
Originally posted by IronFist
Muay Thai/BJJ
muay thai has awesome feet but I don’t think i’d rate it’s hands the most competitive compared to say shaolin where you have a range of fists and elements in relation to strike app etc. All opinions welcome though 