I am amazed at how many people in this forum judge arts by what they have seen in “competitions”.
Let me just clarify: do you honestly, sincerely believe that people who train in martial arts with their heart and soul, who have made it their way of life, who’s skill has gone beyond anything we can comprehend, are going to appear in a competition or magazine to promote their arts?
IMO, the ones who you don’t see or hear about are the scary ones. Every arts has it’s “behind closed doors” groups, who you will never have the privaledge of meeting.
i think to judge any art by its performers in competition is more naivity than progress, and a waste of time.
Let me just clarify: do you honestly, sincerely believe that people who train in martial arts with their heart and soul, who have made it their way of life, who’s skill has gone beyond anything we can comprehend, are going to appear in a competition or magazine to promote their arts?
I don’t find them any more scary then I do pro fighters who train anywhere between 4 and 10 hours a day. In fact, I find them less scary than the pro fighters, no matter what style. Why? Because they are in tremendous shape. You don’t have to be an accomplished “master” to really do damage to someone.
Different people see different skills in different light.
I agree in the sense that to many people judge a style by what is seen by magazines,movies,tournamentsetc.and believe that is all there is to a style or if a student is bad the style must be bad or the teacher(which can be true sometimes).Also many styles are watered down or made to look flashy to attract attention or customers.Many teachers have to make their training easier so they do not lose (they become fast food schools)students especially if that is how they make their living.The things above are usually avoided in a non-public(underground) school.I dont mean all public schools are bad,but quite a lot are.
I don’t believe anyone’s skill can go beyond what I can comprehend. I also don’t believe that a high degree of skill makes you immune to the usual worldly concerns. You sound like you spend too much time licking toads and meditating upon crystal wands to me.
I agree weightvest. I really don’t see the originators of our styles, walking toward a ring with his family holding onto his shoulders. Problem is … everyone that doesn’t compete will claim to be one of these secret grand fighters.
I find it amazing that so many people judge arts by what the masters and grandmasters of a style were supposedly able to do. Like it really matters that they were 1309324.5 - 0 in challenge matches. What does that say about YOUR ability? Is your teacher capable of doing the things that your grandmasters were? If not, then why do you think that you will be able to?why did your grandmaster fight in challenge matches? How does that differ from the mma guys that do it?
Do you honestly believe that sport fighters have not made MA their life? I train 2.5 - 4 hours per day, 4-5 days a week, and that doesn’t include gym time. I know MP, BS, suntzu and the other sport guys are doing the same. Imagine what pros do…
you think it’s naive to judge an art based on how its competitors fare in competition, but you think it’s okay to judge an art by it;s fighters whose fighting you have never seen? :rolleyes:
I judge their effectivness by their reasons for training. Training for a sport is inferior to the monks and fighters of China that trained in order to defend their lives. If a fighter in the “octagon circle” looses he has a brusied ego. If the latter fighters lost, they died.
that’s exactly the attitude I’m talking about… THEY fought for THEIR lives… are you? hell no. Consequently, I gurarantee you that you aren’t training the way they did. And since you don’t have to on a regular basis like some of them did, then you will never fight like them. That being the case, why use them to judge a style’s effectiveness? You are basing your assumption on the style’s history, which has no significant bearing on it’s present or future states…
Excuse me? I wasn’t comparing myself to them. I was comparing masters of old to sport fighters.
That being the case, why use them to judge a style’s effectiveness? You are basing your assumption on the style’s history, which has no significant bearing on it’s present or future states…
I disagree. The art of the old masters was refined to as near perfection as possible, because what didn’t work basically got you killed. Kind of survival of the fittest. Do I want to go back to that? No, I don’t. But do I want to study what they developed over hundreds of years of refining? Heck yeah. I’ll take that any day over something that is “proven in the ring.” And this is not to knock those that are in the ring, they are fabulous athletes. They are just not my cup of tea.
I do shaolin because I have seen it work, I have made it work, and I like it. Not because the shaolin monks used it to defend their temples. So you see, no contradiction.
Because they are in tremendous shape. You don’t have to be an accomplished “master” to really do damage to someone.
plus they are harder to hurt. i can hit hard. but there’s only so much damage i can take.
seven …
that’s exactly the attitude I’m talking about… THEY … You are basing your assumption on the style’s history, which has no significant bearing on it’s present or future states…
dude your talking to a fu cking wall or a really funny troll. i think most people agree with you completely. it’s wierd how they can get to you at first though.
themeecer …
you still havent responded to me on my don’t play with matches thread.
Originally posted by themeecer
[B]Excuse me? I wasn’t comparing myself to them. I was comparing masters of old to sport fighters.
I disagree. The art of the old masters was refined to as near perfection as possible, because what didn’t work basically got you killed. Kind of survival of the fittest. Do I want to go back to that? No, I don’t. But do I want to study what they developed over hundreds of years of refining? Heck yeah. I’ll take that any day over something that is “proven in the ring.” And this is not to knock those that are in the ring, they are fabulous athletes. They are just not my cup of tea. [/B]
If you had a time machine, I bet we’d see that the real difference isn’t in the art that they developed - it’s in how they trained.
But have you seen Shaolin win an UFC yet? How could you have picked Shaolin when Gracie’s BJJ dominates the UFC? (No offense to those guys .. just using it as an example) (Actually I don’t know if they still dominate .. it has been years since I watched any of those, they got boring)
If one dude made an art work for him, that is good for him but doesn’t mean that much. It means that he was a talented martial artist and/or a gifted fighter.
If a lot of dudes can make an art work, then that says a bit more about the art.
If the art consistently produces people who can use the art, then you would have to say that it has a good reputation.
But have you seen Shaolin win an UFC yet? How could you have picked Shaolin when Gracie’s BJJ dominates the UFC? (No offense to those guys .. just using it as an example) (Actually I don’t know if they still dominate .. it has been years since I watched any of those, they got boring)
at least that happened today and i can see a tape of it.
