I’ve heard plenty of people say, “there is no superior martial art”, “only superior martial artists.” But that’s b*******. I think that’s something sifu’s say to both protect their own art, and give credit to other arts in the process. There has to be a style of fighting that no matter how unskilled the practitioner…their odds of winning in a scuffle are at least even no matter who the opponent is. Truthfully(in your honest opinion)…what’s the most dominant fighting style?
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu + Boxing + Wrestling + Judo + Muay Thai Kickboxing + San Shou + Sambo + SWAT + Fillipino Martial Arts (stick/knife) = the best martial art
anymore to add?
Ghostface.
Why do we have so many MA styles and not one that has all the answers?
Cheers.
quote: There has to be “a” style of fighting
“a” meaning one smarta** 
Originally posted by Laughing Cow
[B]Ghostface.
Why do we have so many MA styles and not one that has all the answers?
Cheers. [/B]
Good question…
But I have the answer. We have so many MA styles because several people discovered how lucrative teaching MA could become. There may not be a style that has all the answers…but there is one that comes close to it…that’s what I’m trying to figure out.
Originally posted by Ghostface
[B]
Good question…
But I have the answer. We have so many MA styles because several people discovered how lucrative teaching MA could become. There may not be a style that has all the answers…but there is one that comes close to it…that’s what I’m trying to figure out. [/B]
For modern MA I would agree, but I don’t think it holds true for MA that have been around for a few centuries.
If there was a single art that guaranteed that for its practitioners, then it would be the only art that survived. Then, it would come down once again to the practitioner and not the art
Originally posted by Laughing Cow
[B]
For modern MA I would agree, but I don’t think it holds true for MA that have been around for a few centuries. [/B]
Could be right…depends
Ghostface.
MA styles in general are NOT created to bet all opponents, but more to counter a thread that existed at that time.
Yes, they evolved and adapted to new opponents and in terms other arts evolved to counter them.
It is a chicken & egg situation.
I come up with a new style/counter/attack and someone will modify their art to counter it.
Thus I don’t believe in the superiority of any art, but thing that they are more like snapshots of a given time & period.
For examples look at the UFC and how their competitors needed to adjust since it’s inception.
Cheers.
Re: The argument to end all arguments
Originally posted by Ghostface
There has to be a style of fighting that no matter how unskilled the practitioner…their odds of winning in a scuffle are at least even no matter who the opponent is. Truthfully(in your honest opinion)…what’s the most dominant fighting style?
Like you had to ask…
Re: The argument to end all arguments
Originally posted by Ghostface
I’ve heard plenty of people say, “there is no superior martial art”, “only superior martial artists.” But that’s b*******. I think that’s something sifu’s say to both protect their own art, and give credit to other arts in the process. There has to be a style of fighting that no matter how unskilled the practitioner…their odds of winning in a scuffle are at least even no matter who the opponent is. Truthfully(in your honest opinion)…what’s the most dominant fighting style?
No. It isn’t bullsh-t.
Why does there have to be “a style of fighting that no matter how unskilled the practitioner…their odds of winning in a scuffle are at least even no matter who the opponent is.” What backing do you have for the idea that this is a certainty? Because to my mind, it’s nothing of the sort.
I can’t help thinking that you have no backing for believing this at all. You just want to believe it. And I can’t really blame you for that. I suspect most of us go through that. Wanting to believe that there’s one place that holds all the answers, if only we can find it. It’s a very appealing idea.
Stuart B.
Good post AP
I really truely believe it is how a person trains, not what a person trains… in our long fist classes we are training for a certain thing… long fist, in our fighting classes, we train to fight, in our weapons classes we learn weapons (traditional cma ones), sometimes we improvise, and try to pull out our concepts, we do some classes that are just technique driven. We do two man drills, etc… If I were to take out my long fist classes where I learn forms and my weapons classes, you’d find similarities to any mma, type thing. The reality of it is I really enjoy doing forms right now, they are fun to me… I do try to pull techs. right out of a form and use them, but I also understand that the forms are sensationalized, but still try to take that concept, make it mine…
Whether it on a bag, a willing person, a sparring partner, or whatever…
Now from what I understand.. you learn a punch in any ma… work it, etc… throws, do that.. don’t always allow them, depends on who the sparring partner is… ground fighting, we don’t do, that is the one thing I’d like to start again, but we did do some in my old cma school…
Re: Re: The argument to end all arguments
Originally posted by apoweyn
[B]
No. It isn’t bullsh-t.
Why does there have to be “a style of fighting that no matter how unskilled the practitioner…their odds of winning in a scuffle are at least even no matter who the opponent is.” What backing do you have for the idea that this is a certainty? Because to my mind, it’s nothing of the sort.
I can’t help thinking that you have no backing for believing this at all. You just want to believe it. And I can’t really blame you for that. I suspect most of us go through that. Wanting to believe that there’s one place that holds all the answers, if only we can find it. It’s a very appealing idea.
Stuart B. [/B]
It really doesn’t go that deep for me. I just believe that there is an art that’s superior. What proof do you have that there isn’t one?
Originally posted by norther practitioner
[B]
I really truely believe it is how a person trains, not what a person trains… [/B]
Seems sensible to me
“I just believe that there is an art that’s superior. What proof do you have that there isn’t one?”
The proof is in the fact that a xingyi guy can beat a BJJ guy, then the BJJ guy can beat a wing chun guy, then the wing chun guy can beat the xingyi guy.
Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
http://www.realfighting.com/0702/danaherframe.html
good s**t
Originally posted by Marky
[B]“I just believe that there is an art that’s superior. What proof do you have that there isn’t one?”
The proof is in the fact that a xingyi guy can beat a BJJ guy, then the BJJ guy can beat a wing chun guy, then the wing chun guy can beat the xingyi guy. [/B]
That could simply be because none of those styles are superior to the other.
“That could simply be because none of those styles are superior to the other.”
Then how does xingyi beat BJJ? How does BJJ beat wing chun? How does wing chun beat xingyi? You could say that it comes down to the martial artist and not the martial art, but that means there’s no best martial art, because it comes down to the martial artist when all is said and done.