Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2007 0:04:35 GMT
And remember - if you know martial arts, then you can improvise techniques. Remember, while people HAVE been practicing and refining this stuff for hundreds of years, it had to start somewhere. And if you can't find a teacher for your own art, get a teacher of another art to give you a foundation to work with, then begin analyzing the potentialities of what you have at hand(sword, sword and shield, etc.) How can you use your weapon to strike effectively? How can you defend yourself with it? What is the most efficient way you can transition to cover an opening? How can you attack while keeping your openings closed? Really really meditate on these and similar questions, and it will have a positive effect on your training. Then of course branch out. Every once in awhile goto a swordsmanship seminar or something. Expand your foundation to other arts - they will ALL benefit one another to some degree. it is interesting to think about how martial arts originated, some people love to say that they were created purposefully all at once; what some other people, including myself believe was that originally everyone was "self taught" then over time people began to share ideas concerning the use of swords or other weapons, as civilizations developed people began to record methods of combat and to combine them. The first Known formalized training with swords was in ancient Egypt but the first swords are a good bit older. The idea of taking a weapon and with no background in its historical use and reasoning out the best way in which to use it is an appealing thought and one which I would be interested in seeing the results of its implementation. It would be fun to compare a "purely logical" sword art to a historical sword art using the same weapon. also, according to some sources Miyamoto Musashi was never taught by a formal master though I would not want to swear to the accuracy of these sources. Musashi, unlike most sword owners in todays world or even on this forum fought duels to the death, when placed in a life or death situation anyone would improvise to defeat thier opponent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2007 4:43:45 GMT
I think martial arts started when after battles or fights happened there were particular guys who always seemed to survive, and so those guys were sought out for advice or just plain copied until it became 'codified'.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jul 8, 2007 14:02:33 GMT
I tend to agree with what adam said, except I find it more in individual or very small skirmishes that this would have taken place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2007 23:42:37 GMT
I tend to agree with what adam said, except I find it more in individual or very small skirmishes that this would have taken place. good point large battles often/always involved projectile weapouns which can kill even the most skilled swordsman my basic point was that in the begianing people just did what they thought would work or what had worked for someone else, if it worked for them they continued to use it in combat if not they were most likely dead or at least hurt
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2007 0:40:13 GMT
You could learn some things. If you don't have the budget or time to do frequent classes a book could certainly help you brush up in between. But I think all that video camera stuff would be a bit of a hassle compared to just having an expert criticize your technique.
I don't think you could ever learn to implement martial arts without sparing. So at the very least you'd need a book and a sparing partner to study the basics. And since one sparing partner will give you a limited amount of experience, it'd be better to have multiple. Of course you always learn more from fighting a superior opponent then fighting one who's at or bellow your level. So there you go, you may as well just take a class.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2007 17:10:12 GMT
Just do a simple test. Read your books, then challenge a "schooled" student in the styles you read about. If you fall, then you have your answer.
One should never kid themselves thinking that because I read this, or saw this movie, or played this video game, that I am well versed. Even training in most "americanized" kwoons/dojo's has little to do with real life applications of hand to hand combat.
If you really want to learn, find a master, become his student. After some time passes, go around and challenge other martial artist and find out what you know, or don't know.
Master Thyself!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2007 5:35:34 GMT
Unfortunately most martial arts these days including bujikan are nothing more than sport.
|
|
|
Post by grahamts on Oct 5, 2007 21:03:41 GMT
Can't agree with you bloodwraith, certainly many martial arts are taught as sports. However many others are certainly not. My own art JuJutsu is in no way a sport, neither is AikiJutsu or Hapkido. There are a multitude of others which certainly would not qualify as sports but I don't want to write a shopping list. Any art which has no competitive element cannot qualify as a sport. There can be no meaningful competition between practitioners of the arts above because to win someone would die or be seriously injured. I'll admit there are so called JuJutsu competitions but as far as I and many others are concerned they are not JuJutsu. Many techniques/strikes are banned and the competitors often wear full body armour. They are more closely related to early Judo with some striking and kicking included than full bloodied JuJutsu. If you mean by sports that we don't actually try to kill, maim or disable each other during practice then you may have a point, but that would be rather counterproductive don't you think
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2007 22:43:56 GMT
I see your point in some area's grahamts, but respectfully disagree in others. "Competition" can mean any "engagement". If you feel that the only way one can when in an engagement is to seriously injure or kill then one is truly not very well versed in his art. Take down's, holds, and simple blocking is all that is required to end an engagement. I've sparred (full contact, no padding) with many in some arts you've mentioned and didn't find that the only way for my highly respected opponents to defend against me was to kill me. Now, this is only my opinon.
|
|
|
Post by grahamts on Oct 6, 2007 0:14:16 GMT
Hi onethought, I understand where you are coming from and in certain limited circumstances a hold down is adequate for the purposes of the engagement. However a real fight for your life is not a sport, I'm not in the slightest bit interested in defending an opponent who has attacked me from the consequences of his/her action. I will react to an attack in such a way as to render the attacker incapabe of continuing the attack (I hope). There is no way that I wish to be grappling on the floor with the chance of other attackers using me as a football I think you are confusing control of ones actions and limiting those actions to the minimum nescessry to defeat the attack with traning fights. Sparring is what it says, sparring, it is not fighting for real. If I put an armlock on a student or training parner they tap submission, I release the lock because I do not wish to break their arm, that is not the case if someone tries to knife me. If someone tries to strangle me I am not going to take them to the ground and grapple with them, I will probably kick them in the groin or knee, punch them in the gut and chin and apply a wrist lock, trying very hard to break their wrist. The fact that 60-80% of fights end up on the ground is the reason that JuJitsuka, etc train in ground work, it is not the be all and end all of the art, just one aspect. The aim is to get to your feet ASAP and leave the other B****ar on the floor. Even the nearest sport to real fighting, cage fighting, is limited because understandably nobody wishes to be seriously injured or disabled, so submissions or knock outs win. Hence the superiority of Gracie JuJitsu for a number of years, due to their concentration on ground work and submission holds. If your attacker is fuelled by drugs or alchohol then frequently they do not really feel pain, so unless you knock them out or break bits of them so they won't work, then they will carry on the attack. If you try to lock up or pin down an individual in that condition they will just laugh at you. I once saw 4 coppers trying to pin down a young woman who was out of her tree on coke, they just about succeeded after 5 or 6 minutes of serious grappling. There are no rules in JuJutsu, nothing is barred, if you have a kitchen sink handy, then hit em with it. The only philosophy is win, otherwise you may well end up being honourably dead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2007 0:48:22 GMT
I see your point and respectfully disagree.
|
|
|
Post by grahamts on Oct 6, 2007 6:18:59 GMT
You're no fun
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2007 16:59:21 GMT
We just have different approaches to self defense. My reasons come from a place that is not popular in this forum, so I don't address them here.
|
|
|
Post by grahamts on Oct 9, 2007 20:39:01 GMT
I think I actually understand exactly where you are coming from, especially after reading your brief account in "General Forum." I don't think we are that far apart. In the situation you described I agree totally with your action and attitude. The response I was describing was to that of a serious and unexpected threat to life. We teach that control is paramount, however the situation may well arise where techniques must be used to their full effect. Just a brief example, my old training partner was waiting at a taxi rank at our local station when there was a loud commotion, two drunks ran out of the station pursued by police. They were both aggressive drunks and were trying to attack the passers by with bottles. The police dived on one of them and the other got away, he headed towards my friend and tried to hit him with the bottle, he ducked, the bottle went past and then the drunk tried to back hand him with it. My friend blocked it and applied a figure 4 lock automatically, also as his training dictated he tried to take the drunk to the floor. Unfortunately the drunk didn't feel the warning pain in his shoulder and fall to the floor but stayed up, the technique was continued correctly and the inevitable happened the shoulder dislocated with a disgusting squelch. The drunk went down screaming, my friend held him down until the police came over and cuffed the drunk. My friend felt sick and the others in the queue let him jump to the front. I haven't given his name as it embarrasses him, however he was controlled, used no more force than nescessary but the attackers arm was still dislocated! That is what I meant when I said that there is no such thing as a real competition between JuJutsuka because if most techniques are carried through to their ultimate conclusion then the result is serious injury or death.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2007 21:15:35 GMT
Okay, I think I see what you are saying.
I'm trained in Wing Chun, Kali, Penkat Silat and a touch of Aikido. These styles, aside from Aikido, are rather brutal in their execution. What I have trained myself to do is fore go the attack, sticking with defense ( My personal style consist almost entirely of blocks). Now, maybe the time will come when I must attack, but typical bar fighter's and the like are simple enough to evade.
I have actually had fun with drunks, simply blocking their aggression until they tired out, or in one case, puked and passed out.
As a matter of fact, there is a story of my Grandmaster who got into a fight at a bowling alley with an individual strung out on cocaine. Grandmaster smashed a bowling ball into the guys crotch but the guy didn't feel a thing. From that point on, Grandmaster went "soft", using only Aikido to flip the guy around which went much better, as Grandmaster controlled the individual until the cops arrived and cuffed him.
Grandmaster actually knew the guy who attacked him, and found out the next day that the guy had to have his testicles removed as they were "smashed" beyond repair. Grandmaster was not happy about this, and regretted not opting for the softer approach to begin with.
Now, my reasoning for blocking only is this. (This is the un-popular point of view in today's society, so I'll mention it briefly) And this is simply, my point of view.
I need to understand that we are all made in the image of God, I will not break, hurt, or destroy that image, I will only defend it.
I hope that was brief enough.
Good talk!
|
|
|
Post by grahamts on Oct 9, 2007 22:45:50 GMT
Onethought, I may not agree with you in all respects, but I certainly respect your position. Good discourse is always fun ;D Graham
|
|
|
Post by joshkoher on Nov 29, 2018 14:29:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Lukas MG (chenessfan) on Nov 29, 2018 16:25:29 GMT
Dude... 2007.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 29, 2018 18:04:24 GMT
It is a long dead corpse lol
I did find the opening of the topic interesting. Didn't read the other discussion but in my own experience in teaching myself from a manual with no visual aid....
It sucks, even with Matt Easton short series on sabre technique, actually fencing with my sabre sparring buddy at club, being taught rapier, and reading accounts of actual combat and how they got used in those scenarios taught me more in the span of one year split in two parts than the whole 2 I tried myself!
|
|