|
Post by rammstein on Mar 12, 2008 2:41:25 GMT
If be unorthodox you mean flexible, then, ok, we may have an accord
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2008 3:04:39 GMT
Let's say you have 2 equally skilled guys in the same art. The guy that veers a little will beat the "straight by the book or ancient manuscript guy" 9 times out of 10.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Mar 12, 2008 3:08:04 GMT
If they're both masters of the art, I'd say that's a highly debatable statement with no basis on fact for either arugment. Conclusions cannot be drawn.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2008 3:08:22 GMT
Actually...no.
Things that are past down are past down because it worked and the guy didn't die. You veer from that at your own peril. 9 times out of 10, what the masters wrote works better then things you think up of. That 1 out of 10 is why new things get written.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2008 3:34:21 GMT
Don't you feel the "by the book guys" are too predictable? I know in hand to hand sparring the unorthodox guys usually wins.
|
|
Razor
Member
Review Points: 55
Today is tomorrow but not yet yesterday
Posts: 501
|
Post by Razor on Mar 12, 2008 4:14:08 GMT
Don't you feel the "by the book guys" are too predictable? I know in hand to hand sparring the unorthodox guys usually wins. Some "by the book" guys care more about perfecting their technique and form them winning sparring matches, at first they will be easy to beat but latter they will be very hard to beat. In sparring or fighting if you don't adapted you will become extinct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2008 4:34:52 GMT
Don't you feel the "by the book guys" are too predictable? I know in hand to hand sparring the unorthodox guys usually wins. Only when your new and don't truely understand why you do the things you do. Trust me, whatever you think you thought up something new, somebody beat you to. The fact that it's not being taught means the person that beat you to it, lost.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2008 7:08:21 GMT
There are different levels of "by the book". The German system does make use faints and misdirections too, its just not the first thing you learn in a WMA practice. Grappling almost always gets ugly unless your just drilling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2008 15:50:52 GMT
I agree with the others. The most frequent problem people run into is either fighting someone inexperienced, or who is taking it easy on them. The other thing is that very few people who study historical fighting styles only fight from "one book", which seems to be a predominant stereotype. The best way to understand how to beat a style is to fight with it, see where you get hit, and where it is hard for you to block. This allows you to both see the weaknesses in other's fighting, and have an idea of how they are going to react when you aim for that weakness.
I know someone who has been fighting with ECW LH for over 30 years. Amazing fencer, because he has read or tried just about everything out there. Part of what makes him so deadly is understanding the strengths and weaknesses, and the "right" way to do things. For example, if he sees you are fighting in the style of Cappo Ferro, and he does X, he knows Cappo Ferro will tell you to do Y, which is countered with Z. If instead he understands the fundamentals so intuitively, he does W instead while you are busy looking for Z. Yet it takes an amazing amount of "book study" to get to this point, and mentally deconstructing the systems to the point where you understand WHY they tell you to do certain things, instead of just "Do X".
|
|