# Can we call MMA a style?



## Finlay (Oct 2, 2017)

Musings while bored at work



I picked up from another discussion where someone said MMA wasn't a style. on the surface i agree with them and the name 'Mixed Martial Arts' also goes some way to confirm this position.

However,

if we compare it to other 'traditional' styles  could it be seen as being a style on its own?

in MMA people train to compete under a set of rules, there are some variations but for the main part the rules are fairly similar. The rules of a competition can dictate/define a style, for example judo, Maui Thai, Taekwondo all (or mostly) train to adhere to the rules of a competition. As the rules change so does the art. I believe this is most obvious in Judo where some rule changes have altered the  art. Maybe/hopefully someone will be able to confirm this

If MMA is not being counted as a style because it is just a mix of other styles, then i would ask what traditional art is not a mix of other styles? and even how isolated is the mix? Are there still fighters that do pure BBJ with pure Maui Thai? or have they also added in a couple of wrestling moves that they saw and/or were introduced to by a high level practitioner. 

Again this is largely the way that traditional styles came about with the founders combining styles or adding techniques to a base style that they were well versed in.

Maybe the strongest argument (in my opinion) for MMA not being classed as a style is that there is no standard across schools.

I am not sure that this is still true, over the years the skills and techniques that are required to be successful in the MMA ring has been boiled done and refined to a specific group which a fighter needs to focus on. Of course we get the occasional exceptions. but in general fighters work to very similar principles. Again this is because of the rules set they all have to fight to.

Also, to this point, how much standard is there in the traditional arts beyond kata/forms. Every teacher has their own take on what the art should be and should look like, this is very true in CMA where you can be hard pressed to find two teachers with the same ideas even within the same style.

so, can we call MMA a style? if not what can we call it?


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 2, 2017)

Finlay said:


> so, can we call MMA a style? if not what can we call it?



Something there's threads on here already about?
What is MMA?


----------



## drop bear (Oct 2, 2017)

yes for the very practical pourpose of going to a gym that trains in that style.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 2, 2017)

Finlay said:


> Musings while bored at work
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, I've made this argument before quite recently.

To nutshell it; if borrowing from other systems disqualifies something from being a style, then most TMA s aren't styles either.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

Personally, I think it's on it's way to becoming a unified style, but it's not there yet.

There are too many people who practice 'MMA' from different schools, with different techniques and styles, even if you could make the argument that most learn muay thai/bjj (which I'm not actually certain you can make, I never cared enough to look into it).

That said, I've got no issue referring to it the same way I would a style, simply because it makes communication easier.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Finlay said:


> Musings while bored at work
> 
> 
> 
> ...





No its "Mixed Martial Arts" (MMA) permanently in terms of identification and classification!

As for a unified system I would say not unified but partly combined in direction and working principle.

You can't unify something that has already been identified as its own full working structure with its rule sets. However you can combine it by burrowing elements that will work within the construct of the environment you are trying to create with its rule sets that you are trying to achieve within a sport environment.

Sports + Martial Arts does not = MMA

Its Sports + Combined Skill Sets = MMA

Hence the fact that a complete systems works best within its own boundaries of application and process

There are limitations of whats crossed over that creates a false positive in its founding nature to advance into sports realms.

You cannot plant certain trees into unbalanced soils, its a whole Yin and Yang concept, the chemistry is off balance and usually something is wrong in the design.

I think that was proven recently with Conor vs Floyd fight to some degree can you see the argument in the forces applied that are opposite in nature and  in principle due to application on the change of rule sets.

Boxing is Boxing  and UFC is UFC hence the cycle and nature of the reality in the argument, thats either in a confinement or detraction state of being from the true form.







Yin and Yang Bro!


----------



## Martial D (Oct 2, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> There are too many people who practice 'MMA' from different schools, with different techniques and styles.



Then Wing Chun, Karate, and TKD arent styles either, just to name a few TMAs this statement is also true of.


----------



## MA_Student (Oct 2, 2017)

Yes


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Then Wing Chun, Karate, and TKD arent styles either, just to name a few TMAs this statement is also true of.


I don't know enough about wing chun, but you are correct with karate and TKD. They're referred to as styles because it's easier communication wise, but the actual styles (for karate) would be shotokan karate, isshin ryu karate, goju ryu karate, shorin ryu karate; same for TKD.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Well I see it differently.

*As an example................*

 -  "The Karate system in the Kyokushinkai style is awesome".

You see my point.

Application of words......


Styles
System
Forms
Types

So I just think we are going to run into these conundrums, patience is a virtue! 

Its unavoidable if you ask me, language is an art form all to itself


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

FighterTwister said:


> Well I see it differently.
> 
> *As an example................*
> 
> ...


To clarify, who are you responding to with the "I see it differently"?

Also, are you suggesting the system or the style is the broader term? I would assume based on kyokushin that you're referring to the style as more specific, but the way you worded it is stating the opposite.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> To clarify, who are you responding to with the "I see it differently"?
> 
> Also, are you suggesting the system or the style is the broader term? I would assume based on kyokushin that you're referring to the style as more specific, but the way you worded it is stating the opposite.



The very intent of leaving a quote out ...........everyone............ whoever would like to reason and accept the fact that it comes down to language, terms, definition and grammar etc

I don't know you, you don't know me, its never personal its the internet we are just chatting.

I'm not suggesting anything its proper English and use of terms I'm addressing.

One is identifying type the other the category does that help!

Its about referencing what you are discussing in terms, expression and choice of words etc.

For us all, practice makes perfect not just in martial arts 

"Precision of Language"-


----------



## marques (Oct 2, 2017)

Originally MMA was only a competition. Then it became a combat sport in itself, if trained within MMA ruleset and context.

What is K1 kickboxing? The same story... A competition that became a combat sport.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

FighterTwister said:


> The very intent of leaving a quote out ...........everyone............ whoever would like to reason and accept the fact that it comes down to language, terms, definition and grammar etc
> 
> I don't know you, you don't know me, its never personal its the internet we are just chatting.
> 
> ...


...that answered literally none of my questions...

The who are you disagreeing with is important because it tells me what you're disagreeing with, rather than knowing your disagreeing with one idea in a thread (that has had people post opposite ideas). I don't care if the disagreement is with me or someone else, but not knowing _what _makes that disagreement entirely pointless.

Then you go on about precision of language, but your own language was still unclear. So i will ask again, *You said karate is a system in kyokushin style. Did you mean this, implying the system is more specific than the style, or did you mean that kyokushin is a style within the karate system?*


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 2, 2017)

Finlay said:


> Maybe the strongest argument (in my opinion) for MMA not being classed as a style is that there is no standard across schools.



Sigh, go on I'll bite even though this argument is 20 years too late. First MMA doesn't have 'schools' like boxing it comes out of gyms. As for standards... winning is the standard people go by. In a competitive sport what else would it be.



FighterTwister said:


> Boxing is Boxing and UFC is UFC



One of my pet hates here. The UFC is a company, a money making business it is not a style or even a sport. You mean MMA not UFC.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 2, 2017)

marques said:


> Originally MMA was only a competition. Then it became a combat sport in itself, if trained within MMA ruleset and context.
> 
> What is K1 kickboxing? The same story... A competition that became a combat sport.


Agreed. And the more "MMA gyms" tend to offer the same basics (with some variations), the more it resembles an organized style. The inherent problem is the distinction between the competition and the training. A purist in any style (or someone studying any blend of styles) could enter an MMA competition. From that perspective, it's a sport, not a style. However, if someone goes to the MMA gym Drop Bear trains at, we could predict much of what we'd see there, with some likely variables. The same goes for most MMA gyms. We could argue there are different sub-styles within the burgeoning "MMA style" (boxing as primary standup vs. Muay Thai, wrestling as primary ground vs. BJJ, etc.), but we can predict which variations we'd see if we looked at a bunch of successful (at MMA fights) gyms.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Sigh, go on I'll bite even though this argument is 20 years too late. First MMA doesn't have 'schools' like boxing it comes out of gyms. As for standards... winning is the standard people go by. In a competitive sport what else would it be.
> 
> 
> 
> One of my pet hates here. The UFC is a company, a money making business it is not a style or even a sport. You mean MMA not UFC.




LoL UFC is money and a company so is Boxing - USA Boxing - Features, Events, Results | Team USA   ......... whats your point?

Boxing churns out trillions hence the Floyd vs Conor reference.

Read my previous posts again and see my meaning or points I'm addressing in my train of thought in a quick reply as I stop by this thread and a few others.

MMA is not a style either LoL its mixed martial arts a group of arts as a training regime if you like.

I mean if we are going to be anal about terms like styles and systems I'm saying that others address in certain posts then we could go on forever here.

Because this discussion relates to a few other threads if you have been following the last two weeks.

Its about opinions, interpretations, perceptions and understanding and characters on this Forum LoL 

As an example with certain subjects say *APPLES *using say the word *CATEGORY* to define the fruit then the *TYPE* as another word to express the many *VARIETY* of apples.

You need to use terms of referencing in the conversation right as a form of describing the subject item or thing etc

Example.......... 25 Different Kinds Of Apples—And The Tasty Benefits Of Each

By the way Martial Arts is full of making money and a business don't deny it or disagree with me on that please because thats the world we live in.

Example:- https://www.amazon.com/Martial-Arts-Individual-Sports-Books/b?ie=UTF8&node=16571

I can see this clearly but hey what ever people want in todays crazy world right, I'm no pro writer but it seems some things are interpreted wrong in some threads as you discuss things.

Opinions - sure but opinions can be wrong if they are based on poor information and assumptions a common theme in many threads so far.

I hope thats clearer to some in Forum if not oh well I tried to the best of my knowledge............... carry on


----------



## drop bear (Oct 2, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. And the more "MMA gyms" tend to offer the same basics (with some variations), the more it resembles an organized style. The inherent problem is the distinction between the competition and the training. A purist in any style (or someone studying any blend of styles) could enter an MMA competition. From that perspective, it's a sport, not a style. However, if someone goes to the MMA gym Drop Bear trains at, we could predict much of what we'd see there, with some likely variables. The same goes for most MMA gyms. We could argue there are different sub-styles within the burgeoning "MMA style" (boxing as primary standup vs. Muay Thai, wrestling as primary ground vs. BJJ, etc.), but we can predict which variations we'd see if we looked at a bunch of successful (at MMA fights) gyms.



And if you really want to upset people. MMA is a style. BJJ, boxing, wrestling and kick boxing are drills.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 2, 2017)

FighterTwister said:


> LoL so is Boxing whats your point?
> 
> Read my previous posts again and see my meaning or points I'm addressing in my train of thought in a quick reply as I stop by this thread a few others.
> 
> ...



I can go to MMA class and train MMA.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> I can go to MMA class and train MMA.



LoL 

I need some scotch  and some music............. MUSIC THREAD - What you listen to............


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> And if you really want to upset people. MMA is a style. BJJ, boxing, wrestling and kick boxing are drills.


Okay, now you're just stirring up ****, DB!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> I can go to MMA class and train MMA.


Oh, on a side note, "mixed martial arts" is to the 2010's what "karate" was to the 1980's. My physical therapist keeps asking me about movements I use in "your mixed martial arts classes" that might be bothering my shoulder.

Congratulations. It's not just a style, it's also a generalization.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 2, 2017)

If MMA isn't a style it is certainly very close to being one. In my opinion it has become a specific kind of martial art for a specific type of competition. All MMA gyms teach striking and grappling. Within that the most is Boxing and Muay Thai though there are some using Karate & TKD styles and of course there are a few additional however for the most part there is the addition of boxing and MT. In grappling there is Judo, Wrestling, and BJJ as well as some Sambo, Catch, and Shooto which most MMA gym use combinations of all the above. The thing is the training for MMA is specific.
Muay Thai for MMA is modified. It isn't the same Muay Thai as in a Muay Thai fight.
Boxing for MMA is modified. It isn't the same as in just a boxing match.
All of the grappling is modified and isn't the same as in their specific training or competition formats.
They are all modified to work within the environment and rule sets for MMA competitions. The training of the techniques have grown to be specific for that environment and in that has become a method of learning, training, practicing, and fighting. Just as K1 has become a specific art for it's competition due to its rule sets. Dutch Style Muay Thai has become its own style because of its rule set and point system compared to Muay Thai.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

I don't doubt that they want to change things and change will come because its all about $$$$$ for all respective parties concerned.

They want to come up with something new its been said combining Martial Arts MMA / UFC and Boxing to gain new ground and market audience.

There will always be traditional martial arts as long as people keep them alive and thats the fight that we are in.

I hope to see renewed emphasis on TMA because thats where the real knowledge is hidden in the intricacies of fighting art and science.

MMA is a sport from a gym perspective not a style and a system of collective arts for UFC events, as a best fitting term and expression!


----------



## marques (Oct 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> I can go to MMA class and train MMA.


Yes, you can. But I doubt you do.


----------



## marques (Oct 2, 2017)

Danny T said:


> ...
> The thing is the training for MMA is specific.
> Muay Thai for MMA is modified. It isn't the same Muay Thai as in a Muay Thai fight.
> Boxing for MMA is modified. It isn't the same as in just a boxing match.
> ...


Good point. MMA is more than a sum (or mix) of parts (or martial arts). It is becoming its own thing with its own identity, (originally) fed off other martial arts. Isn't it the same for all modern martial arts?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

FighterTwister said:


> I mean if we are going to be anal about terms like styles and systems I'm saying that others address in certain posts then we could go on forever here.


I'm going to assume this was addressed to me. I was not being anal, I wanted clarification so that when we converse we're on the same page. I'm fine with using whatever words you want, I just need to know what those words mean to you.

However, at this point you've responded to me twice now, along with others, ignoring my attempts at direct conversation and instead just being passive-aggressive. To me, that's a cue you don't want an actual conversation, you want to be right, so I hope that works out for you.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 2, 2017)

marques said:


> Yes, you can. But I doubt you do.



I jazz ballet for the streets man.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 2, 2017)

FighterTwister said:


> LoL UFC is money and a company so is Boxing - USA Boxing - Features, Events, Results | Team USA ......... whats your point?



Boxing is a company? Really? You are making the mistake of assuming UFC is what fighters are doing when they fight, basic fanboy ignorance. 



FighterTwister said:


> By the way Martial Arts is full of making money and a business don't deny it or disagree with me on that please because thats the world we live in.



I won't deny some martial artists are in it for money, and why shouldn't they be but to say martial arts is 'full' of making money is rubbish. Most gyms and schools in the UK aren't businesses and don't do it for the money. 



FighterTwister said:


> MMA is a sport from a gym perspective not a style and a system of collective arts for UFC events, as a best fitting term and expression!



You keep calling them 'UFC' events, I suppose you realise there are many other promotions out there as well the UFC? 


I think you don't actually know very much about MMA and are trying to sound as if you know what you are talking about. Sadly you don't, basically it doesn't matter whether you think it's a style or not because MMAers don't care what you think.




FighterTwister said:


> I don't doubt that they want to change things and change will come because its all about $$$$$ for all respective parties concerned.



Not sure who the 'they' you refer to are but there are many amateur MMA fighters who don't fight for a purse and have no intentions of ever doing so. They enjoy training MMA and like to have a bout every so often to challenge themselves and confirm their training.




FighterTwister said:


> There will always be traditional martial arts as long as people keep them alive and thats the fight that we are in.




Yes martial arts will always be around and no that's not a fight we are in. You seem not to know about the 'Kung Fu' can kick boxing' fads that went around, martial arts weren't threatened by them and MMA isn't a threat, after all where do you think the techniques in MMA come from if not TMA? I think you are just trying to stir things up here for your own enjoyment. please don't try to patronise posters here with your little talks about opinions etc, you don't have the answers to everything martial arts, you don't even have the questions.


----------



## marques (Oct 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> I jazz ballet for the streets man.


It's more your style. But that's fine. It's a free world!


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

...................I'm out to get you.......... boo........ LoL

Relax mate,  what I'm addressing is more like covering a few threads and whoever is wishing to discuss here you or anyone for that matter, how clear can I be LoL

Its not personal, although i would advise critique the post not the poster could fall into better ways of understanding this Forum as we all chat together.

The anal part is again the emphasis on people sticking to particular words that are out of place or meaning. 

I hope we both have good anal functions because we need it as we get older LoL  

Or I could say I love you mate relax but thats weird, right LoL


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Boxing is a company? Really? You are making the mistake of assuming UFC is what fighters are doing when they fight, basic fanboy ignorance.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Opinions of course vary  we all have one they run like toilet paper. LoL


----------



## Buka (Oct 2, 2017)

In conversation, I find myself recognizing it as it's own style. But that's just in my world. For instance, if I was discussing Martial Arts guys with my friends, and they didn't know who I meant, I'd say....

Tae-Kwon-Do guy out of Detroit, tall, wears nice suits. 
Kickboxer, black hair, beard, southern accent.
MMA guy, walks his dog in the park, always eating fruit.
Uechi Guy, drives a green pickup, hot girlfriend.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 2, 2017)

FighterTwister said:


> ...................I'm out to get you.......... boo........ LoL
> 
> Relax mate,  what I'm addressing is more like covering a few threads and whoever is wishing to discuss here you or anyone for that matter, how clear can I be LoL
> 
> ...



Really? I think you are actually off in your own little world and not actually engaging in meaningful conversation because it reads like you are having a conversation with someone we aren't privy to. I think I've been here a tad longer than you so probably don't need to be told how to 'understand' this place.  You might want to keep your scatological comments to yourself, we really don't need to know.
Oh and I'm not your 'mate'.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Really? I think you are actually off in your own little world and not actually engaging in meaningful conversation because it reads like you are having a conversation with someone we aren't privy to. I think I've been here a tad longer than you so probably don't need to be told how to 'understand' this place.  You might want to keep your scatological comments to yourself, we really don't need to know.
> Oh and I'm not your 'mate'.




Get over your self and don't make things personal take matters more lightly so you dont work yourself up might help here also!

Your aggression is unwarranted as to why let me know privately

Have a great day your above statement sheds more light on you than me considering your private message two weeks ago!

Its no skin off my nose but relax I sent you a PM if you want to chat privately.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 2, 2017)

FighterTwister said:


> Get over your self and don't make things personal take matters more lightly so you dont work yourself up might help here also!
> 
> Have a great day your above statement sheds more light on you than me considering your private message two weeks ago!
> 
> Its no skin off my nose but relax I sent you a PM if you want to chat privately.



So you are turning into one the bullies?  Shame. I'm not taking this personally nor am I worked up, you wouldn't like it if I were, trust me. I just telling what I see. You are making nonsense claims like 'boxing being a company'. Stick to what you know and you won't get upset when someone disagrees with you.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> So you are turning into one the bullies?  Shame. I'm not taking this personally nor am I worked up, you wouldn't like it if I were, trust me. I just telling what I see. You are making nonsense claims like 'boxing being a company'. Stick to what you know and you won't get upset when someone disagrees with you.



No I'm not a bully at all, however I can conversate and stick to my opinion and formalize my argument for it, holding my own so to speak there is a difference.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 2, 2017)

Due to the unpleasant PM's he's sent, fightertwister is now on ignore. A shame considering I stood up for him when he first came on the site as some were upsetting him.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 2, 2017)

MMA striking is different than mt, boxing, or karate, but it draws on all three(and more)

MMA grappling is different than wrestling, BJJ, or judo, but it draws on all three(and more)

To say MMA is just a patchwork of styles betrays an ignorance of the subject.

But to be honest, the primary opponent to this idea has betrayed his ignorance of martial arts in general with his first post, and every post since..so who cares really...


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Due to the unpleasant PM's he's sent, fightertwister is now on ignore. A shame considering I stood up for him when he first came on the site as some were upsetting him.



You have all of a sudden chosen to bite in two posts and all I'm doing is trying to understand your angle here or why you have taken this action towards me.

Please don't lie about unpleasant Post Message its in my in box as well you know to copy and paste in Forum if you like, all I did was ask you to carry this issue privately in a post message you are taking this further than it should go, however its your choice to proceed as you like.

But if you chose to behave like a child and that was my reply to you in the post message you ought to be told to grow up, in like manner.

Since you did not respect my wishes to avoid Forum dispute, this would be fair and correct am I right or not?

I will always be who I am and willing to chat privately or openly to either resolve the matter or help you understand who I am as it seems you have taken me the wrong way.

What you did upon registering sending me a PM was to warn me about the Forum now you change your heart and stance on the matter that you did on your own accord, cant blame me for your actions or in inactions.

I wasn't seeking your help but I replied with much appreciation and thanks as to why the sudden turn that says more about you than me and you have made this thread off topic and very public.

Its no skin off my nose if you ignore me thats your choice to befriend or not to befriend I'm here just conversating and we all have opinion TEZ3 and in some cases its better to say.....

"We will have to Agree to Disagree"................. when we don't see eye to eye!

I have used that a few times already in Forum, you cant blame me if I am confident in my stance or opinion.

You might not like confrontation hence your over reaction but I know have learned to confront and maintain respect in my personal life and professional life, I think this is what you struggle with. 

I'm here to chat further privately at any point you wish to address me again, door is open so to speak..................................

TEZ3 I'm 45 years of age married with kids you must have thought I was some kid here.

So I really don't understand your angle at all.

You also must have assumed I have no experience to offer or knowledge to share or that I would be some ignorant person upon registering here at Martialtalk. 

I mean thanks for the initial heads up but I also can hold my own or at least I know how to contact a mod this is not my first time on a Forum by the way.

I'm here to discuss and be part but I'm no novice on these subjects nor am I not an uneducated person.

However I will be assertive no different than anyone else here especially on my views and opinions but respect the person always or least as much as possible.

Sad that you took it all in this way oh well thats life.

Take care!


----------



## Danny T (Oct 2, 2017)

'USA Boxing' is an amateur boxing association is is not a style of boxing though it is only for amateurs.
'Sugar Bert is another amateur boxing production.
Then there are numerous Boxing Associations that rank boxers within their perspective divisions and again they are not a style of boxing
Also there are numerous Production companies;
Golden Boy Productions is a Professional boxing promotion company.
Don King Productions is a Professional boxing promotion company.
Main Events is a Boxing promotion company.
There are many other boxing promotion companies and associations. 
They are not a Style of boxing.


----------



## FighterTwister (Oct 2, 2017)

Aggh forget this conversation why bother?


----------



## DaveB (Oct 2, 2017)

Finlay said:


> Musings while bored at work
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No.

It's not a martial art, it's a sport. Nothing wrong with that, sports are probably the single best way to train martial arts, but one is not the other.

And yes that does mean Tkd judo muay thai etc are all sports too. The difference is that there are arts that inform the sport format. They are what you employ if you need to fight to defend your life, e.g. Tkd has knees elbows and joint locks not seen in the sport.


----------



## Steve (Oct 2, 2017)

Is MMA a style?  I think so.  10 years ago, maybe not, but I think that while there are different flavors of MMA, because it is a sport for which people train specifically, it's as much a style as any other similar activity.  Western Boxing, San Shou, Judo, Muay Thai.


----------



## Steve (Oct 2, 2017)

DaveB said:


> No.
> 
> It's not a martial art, it's a sport. Nothing wrong with that, sports are probably the single best way to train martial arts, but one is not the other.
> 
> And yes that does mean Tkd judo muay thai etc are all sports too. The difference is that there are arts that inform the sport format. They are what you employ if you need to fight to defend your life, e.g. Tkd has knees elbows and joint locks not seen in the sport.


Does this mean that Kyokushin Karate is a sport and not a martial art?  What about Kyudo?  Iaido?  Fencing? 

Is this true for any martial art that embraces competition, or is there some kind of test you apply to distinguish between a martial art with competition or a sport with a martial art base?  I mean, there are aikido competitions, and tai chi competitions, as well. 

Is a style that has forms competitions, but no fighting competitions still a sport? 

I think this is a little more confusing that you let on.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 2, 2017)

Steve said:


> Is MMA a style?  I think so.  10 years ago, maybe not, but I think that while there are different flavors of MMA, because it is a sport for which people train specifically, it's as much a style as any other similar activity.  Western Boxing, San Shou, Judo, Muay Thai.


And if not yet, it's certainly on its way there.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 2, 2017)

DaveB said:


> No.
> 
> It's not a martial art, it's a sport. Nothing wrong with that, sports are probably the single best way to train martial arts, but one is not the other.
> 
> And yes that does mean Tkd judo muay thai etc are all sports too. The difference is that there are arts that inform the sport format. They are what you employ if you need to fight to defend your life, e.g. Tkd has knees elbows and joint locks not seen in the sport.


I guess this would be true if everyone that trained in mma competed. Yet, that is not the case. Just like any other martial art, you will find children's classes, seniors classes, and plenty of people in between that do it for health, fitness, fun, discipline, and every other reason behind doing a martial art.


----------



## punisher73 (Oct 2, 2017)

Is "mma" a sport or a style?  Yes.

In the earlier days of the UFC, Marco Ruas taught his blend of "mma" called, "Ruas Vale Tudo", one of the first to combine Muay Thai and BJJ and showcase it in the sports world.  The only difference in if MMA is a style or a sport is what one wishes to call it.  Once you "formalize" your approach and give it your own name it is a "style".

Always has been the history of styles.  As soon as you add, subtract it was given a new name.  In some cases the additions to the base style ended up in a new name of the approach.  In other cases, the modifications were minor and the suffix "-ha" was added with the person's name/style to show that it was the Style X of Joe Schmo.  In the history of many okinawan systems they were named after the person who founded them.  Uechi-ryu or Motobu-ryu for example.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> No.
> 
> It's not a martial art, it's a sport. Nothing wrong with that, sports are probably the single best way to train martial arts, but one is not the other.
> 
> And yes that does mean Tkd judo muay thai etc are all sports too. The difference is that there are arts that inform the sport format. They are what you employ if you need to fight to defend your life, e.g. Tkd has knees elbows and joint locks not seen in the sport.



What if I do MMA but don't compete?

I mean people use MMA to fight to defend their lives as much as any other martial artist.

More if you believe YouTube.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 3, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I guess this would be true if everyone that trained in mma competed. Yet, that is not the case. Just like any other martial art, you will find children's classes, seniors classes, and plenty of people in between that do it for health, fitness, fun, discipline, and every other reason behind doing a martial art.



Do you stop being a martial artist if you compete?

I feel this is going straight in to crazy town.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 3, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Do you stop being a martial artist if you compete?
> 
> I feel this is going straight in to crazy town.



I suppose it makes a change from the 'you are a bad instructor if you charge students' line.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 3, 2017)

Okay, I'll weigh in on the "sport" vs. "art" issue.

I'll use Judo, because I think I know enough of the history (others here will surely correct any mistakes I make) to use it as an example. Kano formed his new system not to be a competition sport, but for the competition to support the learning. So, Judo is an art. AND Judo is a sport. Someone may participate in the sport, but the training can be the art.

Now, it's possible to train only for the sport, and we could argue those people aren't participating in the art. I won't bother to make that argument, because I think it's a meaningless distinction that requires an elitist view of martial arts - that there must be "higher purpose", or it's not an art. (N.B. - I teach with a "higher purpose", so I'm not taking a shot at those who believe that's a good thing.)

I hear people arguing linguistically about the proper use of the term "art" to separate it from "sport". I consider that argument specious, at best. And the same for those who say it's not "martial" unless it was derived from the battlefield, meant to kill, etc. Both of those are literalist arguments, and ignore the fact that words change meanings in context, especially when used in consistent phrases (like "martial art").


----------



## Martial D (Oct 3, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Do you stop being a martial artist if you compete?
> 
> I feel this is going straight in to crazy town.


That's a good point.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> Does this mean that Kyokushin Karate is a sport and not a martial art?  What about Kyudo?  Iaido?  Fencing?
> 
> Is this true for any martial art that embraces competition, or is there some kind of test you apply to distinguish between a martial art with competition or a sport with a martial art base?  I mean, there are aikido competitions, and tai chi competitions, as well.
> 
> ...



I was unclear.

TKD, Judo, Kyokushin, Kyudo etc are martial arts.

They are ma because they are primarily  (arguably in judo's case) self defence systems. The sport aspects of these arts are bolted on and informed by the proclivities of the parent art.

A sport is a game whose existence and limits are a set of rules governing winning and the conduct to achieve victory.

Boxing, wrestling and MMA are all sports.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 3, 2017)

Boxing, wrestling, and MMA (the term) have all grown into a sport over many years of families, tribes, clans, armies, etc. have taught their groups how to fight in numerous ways. Many have evolved into sport as friendly ways to compete or even to prevent wars. 
Non the less they are arts of fighting can be utilized as a sport.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> I was unclear.
> 
> TKD, Judo, Kyokushin, Kyudo etc are martial arts.
> 
> ...


Boxing is a sport. Training for boxing is arguably just part of the sport. What if someone trains at a boxing gym, with no intention to compete? What do we make of it then? I don't think the "it's for self-defense" argument is entirely valid, since there are MA which aren't focused on that (Shin-shin Toitsu Aikido would be an example, from what I know of it).


----------



## Steve (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> I was unclear.
> 
> TKD, Judo, Kyokushin, Kyudo etc are martial arts.
> 
> ...


So, bjj is a martial art, but kendo is not?


----------



## Martial D (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> I was unclear.
> 
> TKD, Judo, Kyokushin, Kyudo etc are martial arts.
> 
> ...


Wait, so Tai chi isn't a martial art? Your goal posts keep shifting.

Also, you seem to be trying to ascribe a one size fits all motivation for doing things. People do all sorts of martial arts for all sorts of reasons. I know tons of people that do mma for self defense purposes.


----------



## Steve (Oct 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Boxing is a sport. Training for boxing is arguably just part of the sport. What if someone trains at a boxing gym, with no intention to compete? What do we make of it then? I don't think the "it's for self-defense" argument is entirely valid, since there are MA which aren't focused on that (Shin-shin Toitsu Aikido would be an example, from what I know of it).


Agreed.  Ultimately, I think the distinction is interesting, but what's more interesting is that based on one's experience, the conclusion is totally different.   In a vacuum where skills are not being applied in life saving situations, competition provides a means to benchmark your progress.  I know I sound like a broken record, but anything you train for but never apply is a sham.  You are either misunderstanding what the application is, or you're being misled. 


DaveB said:


> I was unclear.
> 
> TKD, Judo, Kyokushin, Kyudo etc are martial arts.
> 
> ...


So, it's more to do with historical intent.  Tai Chi is a martial art because, theoretically, it was once trained for self defense.  Ninjutsu is a martial art because, theoretically, at one time, it was trained for self defense.  Same for BJJ and Judo, but not for Sambo or Catch Wrestling, even though all four of these arts are extremely similar in technique, training approach and views on competition. 

I think, if you're trying to distinguish between sports and arts, I get what you're trying to say.  I just don't think it holds up very well because martial arts are too diverse.  I also think that, in general, competition results in more reliable skill development and provides a clear path to expertise, which is the primary reason non-competitive arts atrophy when the crime rates are low, and sport arts thrive.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Boxing is a sport. Training for boxing is arguably just part of the sport. What if someone trains at a boxing gym, with no intention to compete? What do we make of it then? I don't think the "it's for self-defense" argument is entirely valid, since there are MA which aren't focused on that (Shin-shin Toitsu Aikido would be an example, from what I know of it).


Something I just thought of. When I was a teenager me and my friends would spend hours playing hockey, doing hockey drills, etc. On the street by my house. None of us were part of a team, or had intention to compete/be part of a team. Does this mean hockey was not a sport for us?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 3, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> Something I just thought of. When I was a teenager me and my friends would spend hours playing hockey, doing hockey drills, etc. On the street by my house. None of us were part of a team, or had intention to compete/be part of a team. Does this mean hockey was not a sport for us?


Well, if you actually played hockey (like my brother and I played football in the back yard), then it was a sport (assuming we use competition as the dividing line, which is a highly subjective place to divide it, but I have to use something). My comment about boxing was that I could go to a boxing gym and never compete in boxing. I'd spar, but not to track points, etc., just to work on the skills. To me, that's not "a sport", though by some definitions, it is "sport".

The same could be applied to your hockey. If you guys only ever did drills, then a case could be made that you weren't participating in the sport of hockey - just doing drills that were developing hockey skills. It's all pretty subjective, which is part of my objection to some of the blanket, black-and-white statements about what is and is not a "martial art". No matter how carefully the line is drawn, there's always going to be something that clearly falls on the "wrong" side of the line.


----------



## Steve (Oct 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Well, if you actually played hockey (like my brother and I played football in the back yard), then it was a sport (assuming we use competition as the dividing line, which is a highly subjective place to divide it, but I have to use something). My comment about boxing was that I could go to a boxing gym and never compete in boxing. I'd spar, but not to track points, etc., just to work on the skills. To me, that's not "a sport", though by some definitions, it is "sport".
> 
> The same could be applied to your hockey. If you guys only ever did drills, then a case could be made that you weren't participating in the sport of hockey - just doing drills that were developing hockey skills. It's all pretty subjective, which is part of my objection to some of the blanket, black-and-white statements about what is and is not a "martial art". No matter how carefully the line is drawn, there's always going to be something that clearly falls on the "wrong" side of the line.


If you go to a basketball court with your buddy, would you hesitate to call that "playing basketball" whether score was kept or not?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> If you go to a basketball court with your buddy, would you hesitate to call that "playing basketball" whether score was kept or not?


And there's that problem I spoke of. If he and I are just shooting baskets and messing around, is that "the sport" or not? Dunno. Not really sure it matters.


----------



## Steve (Oct 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> And there's that problem I spoke of. If he and I are just shooting baskets and messing around, is that "the sport" or not? Dunno. Not really sure it matters.


I think it is a martial art... if you play like my buddies.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> I think it is a martial art... if you play like my buddies.


If you play like me, it's more of a tragi-comedy.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> Agreed.  Ultimately, I think the distinction is interesting, but what's more interesting is that based on one's experience, the conclusion is totally different.   In a vacuum where skills are not being applied in life saving situations, competition provides a means to benchmark your progress.  I know I sound like a broken record, but anything you train for but never apply is a sham.  You are either misunderstanding what the application is, or you're being misled.
> So, it's more to do with historical intent.  Tai Chi is a martial art because, theoretically, it was once trained for self defense.  Ninjutsu is a martial art because, theoretically, at one time, it was trained for self defense.  Same for BJJ and Judo, but not for Sambo or Catch Wrestling, even though all four of these arts are extremely similar in technique, training approach and views on competition.
> 
> I think, if you're trying to distinguish between sports and arts, I get what you're trying to say.  I just don't think it holds up very well because martial arts are too diverse.  I also think that, in general, competition results in more reliable skill development and provides a clear path to expertise, which is the primary reason non-competitive arts atrophy when the crime rates are low, and sport arts thrive.



I don't disagree except to say that the sport of boxing is a good training exercise for strikers of any TMA. Training is it's own activity and not limited by style, meaning there's nothing stopping a ninjutsu guy training like a pro Thai fighter in addition to the style specific skills.

My differentiation is much more about what sport is and is not as opposed to what makes an ma.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 3, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Wait, so Tai chi isn't a martial art? Your goal posts keep shifting.
> 
> Also, you seem to be trying to ascribe a one size fits all motivation for doing things. People do all sorts of martial arts for all sorts of reasons. I know tons of people that do mma for self defense purposes.



My goalposts aren't shifting, I explained myself poorly. 

How did you get from my response that Tai chi isn't a martial art?

I'm not basing my answer on why people do things but by the reason for the things existence. It's purpose.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> So, bjj is a martial art, but kendo is not?


I would need to know more about them to answer.

I would also argue that the status could change if you could show that the martial elements of the art had become extinct in favour of the sport methods.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Boxing is a sport. Training for boxing is arguably just part of the sport. What if someone trains at a boxing gym, with no intention to compete? What do we make of it then? I don't think the "it's for self-defense" argument is entirely valid, since there are MA which aren't focused on that (Shin-shin Toitsu Aikido would be an example, from what I know of it).




Training is niether sport nor martial art it is training.

I could go boxing because I want to run a marathon, but while in the gym I am not competing in the sport of marathon running nor the sport of boxing, I am training.

As I said before it's the purpose of the activity that informs it's classification. 
Winning a competition = sport
Defenestrating Ninja assailants (not the everyday ninja you see at the bus stop) = martial arts.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Training is niether sport nor martial art it is training.
> 
> I could go boxing because I want to run a marathon, but while in the gym I am not competing in the sport of marathon running nor the sport of boxing, I am training.
> 
> ...


So, if someone trains TKD for the purpose of TKD competition, it's no longer a MA in their case? If someone teaches boxing as a fighting style for self-defense, does it become a martial art? Do you see how muddy this gets? There's never going to be a nice, straight line that can be drawn between "martial art" and "not martial art".


----------



## Martial D (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> My goalposts aren't shifting, I explained myself poorly.
> 
> How did you get from my response that Tai chi isn't a martial art?
> 
> I'm not basing my answer on why people do things but by the reason for the things existence. It's purpose.


You wrote - "*They are ma because they are primarily (arguably in judo's case) self defence systems"
*
This would seem to eliminate Tai Chi from the 'martial arts' category?

As for your new distinction, are you claiming the only purpose for mma is to compete, that the only possible intent behind doing it is competition?

Yet at the same time if someone joins karate only to compete they are doing a martial art?

I'm not seeing any solid distinction here.


----------



## Steve (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> I would need to know more about them to answer.
> 
> I would also argue that the status could change if you could show that the martial elements of the art had become extinct in favour of the sport methods.


Yeah, man.  I start to think I'm understanding and then you say Tai Chi is a martial art. 

It would help if you could just yay or nay some of the following.  Sport or MA?

Tai Chi
Iaido
Kendo
Kyudo
BJJ
Sambo
Catch Wrestling
Ninjutsu
Kyokushin Karate
TKD
Shotokan Karate
Goju Ryu Karate
Fencing
HEMA
Kali/Escrima


----------



## Buka (Oct 3, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Training is niether sport nor martial art it is training.
> 
> I could go boxing because I want to run a marathon, but while in the gym I am not competing in the sport of marathon running nor the sport of boxing, I am training.
> 
> ...



Always did love a good defenestration.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 4, 2017)

Buka said:


> Always did love a good defenestration.



It's fallen out of favour in recent years though.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 4, 2017)

Martial D said:


> You wrote - "*They are ma because they are primarily (arguably in judo's case) self defence systems"
> *
> This would seem to eliminate Tai Chi from the 'martial arts' category?
> 
> ...



Because you are talking about what people do and I am talking about the purpose of the activity.

mixed martial arts is a combat sport. You are not doing mixed martial arts unless you are in a mma competition. 

When you go to the mma gym you are training. It is a different activity to playing a sport. Why you train is your business it doesn't change what a sport is.
As for Taichi, it might be helpful if you elaborate on why you think a self defense/combat origin removes Taichi from the rank of martial art?

Are you distinguishing between Taichi and Taichi chuan?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 4, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Because you are talking about what people do and I am talking about the purpose of the activity.
> 
> mixed martial arts is a combat sport. You are not doing mixed martial arts unless you are in a mma competition.
> 
> ...


Okay, I think this is part of the communication issue. You're using the original definition of "mixed martial arts". That definition has begun to shift (as definitions do) by usage. The term now often also refers to the training in those gyms. So, yes, someone training in an MMA gym is doing MMA - they are just not competing in it. Decades ago, someone competing in MMA, if asked what they trained in, would answer something like "Kyokushin Karate". Years ago, it might have been "Muay Thai and catch wrestling". Now, many of them might rightly answer "MMA". They don't necessarily train in the separate disciplines. Some still train separate disciplines, and many are still going to classes on specific arts/styles, but some are training "stand-up fighting" and "ground fighting", each being potentially a mixture of techniques from various disciplines. And someone training in the same class/group as those competitors (but not competing) is also training in MMA.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 4, 2017)

Steve said:


> Yeah, man.  I start to think I'm understanding and then you say Tai Chi is a martial art.
> 
> It would help if you could just yay or nay some of the following.  Sport or MA?
> 
> ...


o... k.
Taichi is ma as far as I know, Martial D thinks otherwise.
Then for iado down to catch wrestling I don't know enough about them. 
For example I know Kendo was constructed as a sport but having never trained it I don't know if the jitsu elements are taught or not.
Sambo and catch wrestling I know nothing about.

Then from ninjutsu to Kali are martial arts except for fencing which is a sport based on martial art.

Again, no disrespect to sports just different things.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 4, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Because you are talking about what people do and I am talking about the purpose of the activity.
> 
> mixed martial arts is a combat sport. You are not doing mixed martial arts unless you are in a mma competition.
> 
> ...


"You aren't doing mma unless you are in an MMA competition"<-----. Umm what? Good luck finding anyone to agree with that. Have you ever stepped foot inside an MMA gym? I encourage you do so and let them know 90% of them aren't actually doing mma, and report the results here.

Also, what people do and the purpose for doing it(which again, varies from person to person despite your insistence to the contrary) are kinda connected.

But again, if it is the 'purpose for doing it' that distinguishes whether it's a martial art or a sport, and doing it for competition means it's not actually martial art, that would mean people that do say, karate, tkd, jui jitsu, primarily to compete aren't actually doing a martial art either. (Which is of course, silly)


----------



## Martial D (Oct 4, 2017)

DaveB said:


> o... k.
> Taichi is ma as far as I know, Martial D thinks otherwise.
> .



No..no I do not think otherwise. Your definition (that I bolded and quoted, twice) excluded it. Your definition said nothing of origins( which seems to me more than a little arbitrary anyway), but "primary purpose". Would you honestly say the primary purpose of taichi is self defense?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 4, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Well, if you actually played hockey (like my brother and I played football in the back yard), then it was a sport (assuming we use competition as the dividing line, which is a highly subjective place to divide it, but I have to use something). My comment about boxing was that I could go to a boxing gym and never compete in boxing. I'd spar, but not to track points, etc., just to work on the skills. To me, that's not "a sport", though by some definitions, it is "sport".
> 
> The same could be applied to your hockey. If you guys only ever did drills, then a case could be made that you weren't participating in the sport of hockey - just doing drills that were developing hockey skills. It's all pretty subjective, which is part of my objection to some of the blanket, black-and-white statements about what is and is not a "martial art". No matter how carefully the line is drawn, there's always going to be something that clearly falls on the "wrong" side of the line.





Steve said:


> If you go to a basketball court with your buddy, would you hesitate to call that "playing basketball" whether score was kept or not?


Steve's response is exactly what I'm getting at. If you want to be technical, you could make the argument that we weren't playing hockey. But, for all intents and purposes, we were. We would do what would be considered drilling, as games. We weren't competing, so we weren't 'training' hockey (the argument I see with MA), and we would play hockey, but when you're playing for 4 hours no one is bothering to keep score.

We were not participating in the competitive sport of hockey, but if someone stopped by and saw us, they would know we were playing hockey, if someone asked one of us what we did last night, we would say playing hockey, if someone took a snapshot of us and compared it to a team playing hockey, the only difference would be the environment/jerseys. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I think it's fair to call it a duck.


----------



## Steve (Oct 4, 2017)

DaveB said:


> o... k.
> Taichi is ma as far as I know, Martial D thinks otherwise.
> Then for iado down to catch wrestling I don't know enough about them.
> For example I know Kendo was constructed as a sport but having never trained it I don't know if the jitsu elements are taught or not.
> ...


No disrespect taken.  I'm really just trying to figure out how much thought you've given this subject.  Weren't you the guy who had a whole thread on how any martial arts style will work if it's trained correctly?  I think so, but may be mistaken.  so, I'm just trying to figure out for myself whether you're just spitballing here, or if this is something that somehow relates to your definition of "martial art."

And it sounds like you just may not be familiar enough with the diversity of styles that exist, and so it's a little easier to take a binary stance.  My opinion is that it's very mushy, where you have sports that evolve into martial arts and martial arts that evolve into sports, and every possible permutation in between.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 4, 2017)

Steve said:


> No disrespect taken.  I'm really just trying to figure out how much thought you've given this subject.  Weren't you the guy who had a whole thread on how any martial arts style will work if it's trained correctly?  I think so, but may be mistaken.  so, I'm just trying to figure out for myself whether you're just spitballing here, or if this is something that somehow relates to your definition of "martial art."
> 
> And it sounds like you just may not be familiar enough with the diversity of styles that exist, and so it's a little easier to take a binary stance.  My opinion is that it's very mushy, where you have sports that evolve into martial arts and martial arts that evolve into sports, and every possible permutation in between.



I am that guy, not sure how that relates? 

I don't think my familiarity or lack thereof really makes a difference. As I said, one need not worry about what a martial art is to know what a sport is. It comes down to the purpose of the activity. The reason that activity exists.
Sports are games to entertain by the drama of waiting to see who will win.
Martial arts are a means of dealing with violence in the world by aiming usually to be better at violence than the other guy.

I know that there is crossover, hence my comments on Kendo and judo. One can change into the other, but all you need ask is what is there more of, or is there anything left of the original purpose?

I class an art as martial art If there is still teaching beyond the sport elements. I know martial judo still exists, but that it is rare. 

This is where we get into the art vs school question. If your classifying the whole art (which is the basis on which I've been talking) then any instances of the original martial purpose are enough to still call it a martial art.

But the individual school may be a sport school, defined by the scope and purpose of the teaching being focused on competitions alone.
You can also have a martial art school with a sport focus where martial elements are taught but the bulk of time is devoted to training for competitions.

Ultimately I am saying that a sport is something that can exist within a martial art. Martial art will always be the bigger subject because it is meant to deal with more than the narrow focus of competition. So long as there is still more to you than sport you are ma. In my book at least.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 4, 2017)

DaveB said:


> I am that guy, not sure how that relates?
> 
> I don't think my familiarity or lack thereof really makes a difference. As I said, one need not worry about what a martial art is to know what a sport is. It comes down to the purpose of the activity. The reason that activity exists.
> Sports are games to entertain by the drama of waiting to see who will win.
> ...



Your issue is that you think a sport is not inherently a means of training for self defence. 

You can use sport within its own boundaries to defend yourself from an attacker. So if someone just did boxing and got attacked on the street. He could use legal boxing to defend himself. To the point that he could even put on 12ounce gloves and use legal boxing to defend himself.

And this is not accounting for the idea that all self defence can involve elements outside the scope of any training.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Your issue is that you think a sport is not inherently a means of training for self defence.
> 
> You can use sport within its own boundaries to defend yourself from an attacker. So if someone just did boxing and got attacked on the street. He could use legal boxing to defend himself. To the point that he could even put on 12ounce gloves and use legal boxing to defend himself.
> 
> And this is not accounting for the idea that all self defence can involve elements outside the scope of any training.



lol If you read my posts you'd know that my "issue", whatever it is, is definitely not that. 



DaveB said:


> I don't disagree except to say that the sport of boxing is a good training exercise for strikers of any TMA. Training is it's own activity and not limited by style, meaning there's nothing stopping a ninjutsu guy training like a pro Thai fighter in addition to the style specific skills.
> 
> My differentiation is much more about what sport is and is not as opposed to what makes an ma.





DaveB said:


> Training is niether sport nor martial art it is training.
> 
> I could go boxing because I want to run a marathon, but while in the gym I am not competing in the sport of marathon running nor the sport of boxing, I am training.
> 
> ...


----------



## DaveB (Oct 5, 2017)

Martial D said:


> "You aren't doing mma unless you are in an MMA competition"<-----. Umm what? Good luck finding anyone to agree with that. Have you ever stepped foot inside an MMA gym? I encourage you do so and let them know 90% of them aren't actually doing mma, and report the results here.
> 
> Also, what people do and the purpose for doing it(which again, varies from person to person despite your insistence to the contrary) are kinda connected.
> 
> But again, if it is the 'purpose for doing it' that distinguishes whether it's a martial art or a sport, and doing it for competition means it's not actually martial art, that would mean people that do say, karate, tkd, jui jitsu, primarily to compete aren't actually doing a martial art either. (Which is of course, silly)



Standing on a Tennis court hitting balls fired from s ball launcher. Are you playing Tennis?

Kicking a football in a sine wave around cones, are you playing football?

So why would you be doing mma when your doing drills in a class?

Yes you can say that sparring is the ma equivalent of playing s sport for fun rather than competition, like kids plsying football in the playground, and that is true. But due to its nature most class sparring I'd say most sessions are meant to be instructive ie more training than playing.... not that it matters. 

The point is simply that training is it's own activity. 

As to the purpose I mentioned for defining ma. I did specify that it is not the purpose of the people in the dojo. 

That means it must but the purpose behind the creation of the martial art: the reason the art exists. 

That is what makes it martial art: existing to preserve people against violence.

Now sport training and even participation in sports are a great way to train a martial art. Sport, through high participation and funding, gets to very efficient training methods and pressure tests technique in a safe environment and in much higher volumes than ma can. But martial art will always include elements unsafe for sport. The sport training will inform the risks and needs to be able to employ said unsafe methods so it's still of high value, but it's not the only valuable training method.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> lol If you read my posts you'd know that my "issue", whatever it is, is definitely not that.



Let's put this simply. Doing the sport is training the self defence.

If you are training for sport you are training for self defence.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Let's put this simply. Doing the sport is training the self defence.
> 
> If you are training for sport you are training for self defence.


Not necessarily.


----------



## Hyoho (Oct 5, 2017)

So why are people that practice the Japanese arts even using the word 'style'? Japanese never use such a word. It's a school (ryu).


----------



## DaveB (Oct 5, 2017)

Hyoho said:


> So why are people that practice the Japanese arts even using the word 'style'? Japanese never use such a word. It's a school (ryu).



Because were not pedants.

Because exclusive technologies are a barrier to communication outside of the circle of their use.

Because then you'd get into arguments about what "actually" constitutes a ryu.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Standing on a Tennis court hitting balls fired from s ball launcher. Are you playing Tennis?
> 
> Kicking a football in a sine wave around cones, are you playing football?
> 
> ...


All that would be valid only if you began with the assumption that mma was only a sport to begin with. Since I don't share that assumption, and you haven't addressed any of my counterpoints, this whole post is pointless.

Again you have defined what a martial art is in such a way that it could include include mma and exclude something like Tai chi (exists to preserve people against violence) unless you have already decided the only possible reason anyone could do mma is to compete..which is patently not the case, however much you insist it must be.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 5, 2017)

To put it another way;

Person A (Bob) wants to learn how to fight. Bob checks around, and finds a karate dojo.

Bob joins, and over time is taught to punch, kick, block. Bob does drills and maybe some sparring, Bob learns how to control his body, after a time, Bob knows karate.

Person b (Steve) wants to learn how to fight. Steve checks around, and finds an MMA gym.

Steve joins, and over time is taught to punch, kick, block(and grapple) Steve does drills and a lot of sparring.steve learns how to control his body. After a time, Steve knows MMA.

Now Bob knows martial arts and Steve doesn't because (insert reason)


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Not necessarily.



Not necessarily if it is a sport like tennis. But is the case if it is a martial art like boxing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Your issue is that you think a sport is not inherently a means of training for self defence.
> 
> You can use sport within its own boundaries to defend yourself from an attacker. So if someone just did boxing and got attacked on the street. He could use legal boxing to defend himself. To the point that he could even put on 12ounce gloves and use legal boxing to defend himself.
> 
> And this is not accounting for the idea that all self defence can involve elements outside the scope of any training.


Good point, DB. It's entirely possible for someone to train for and participate in a sport (MMA, boxing, Judo), training only the moves for that sport, within the rules of that sport, for the purpose of self-defense. And someone teaching/coaching that sport could easily make a few adjustments and teach the sport (while training for the sport, under the rules of the sport) for self-defense.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 5, 2017)

Hyoho said:


> So why are people that practice the Japanese arts even using the word 'style'? Japanese never use such a word. It's a school (ryu).


The difference between literal translation and meaningful translation. While "school" technically has the same meaning, it's rarely used that way ("school of thought" is the only example I can think of off the top of my head). When we refer to different approaches to dancing, we don't refer to them as "schools", but as "styles". And that distinction seems more appropriate in English (to me, anyway).


----------



## DaveB (Oct 5, 2017)

Martial D said:


> To put it another way;
> 
> Person A (Bob) wants to learn how to fight. Bob checks around, and finds a karate dojo.
> 
> ...



Again my reasoning is not based on what the individuals reasons for practicing are.

My definition is based on the reason the activity was created.

I could be wrong, but what I know of mma is that it is a combat sport format that invited all comers and over time as people played rock paper scissors with their arts they realised they needed to know something from each range specialism, hence mixed martial arts.

That to me is a sport. 

Tai chi as I read it was created to be a fighting method and was taught to the imperial guard of one of China's emperor's. 

That to me is a martial art.

Can one become the other? Sure, but it takes a while and involves the expansion or extinction of certain elements. 

I think I was pretty clear before so I don't get why you keep bringing up people's reasons for training? I'm not being funny but I feel like something is getting lost in translation. 

As to counter points I missed, please point them out and I'll give it a go.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Not necessarily if it is a sport like tennis. But is the case if it is a martial art like boxing.


Not really. The focus of boxing is too narrow. MMA training makes a better case but it's still limited because of its focus and the more focussed the individual is on sport the further he gets from SD.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> My definition is based on the reason the activity was created.


Okay, but that means we have to track an activity back to some original purpose. What if the purpose changes? If someone opens a school teaching self-defense using what has been learned from MMA competition (so the "MMA style"), then the purpose of the activity within that school is self-defense. But it's MMA - the exact same things they were practicing at the gym where she trained, using all the same methods, approaches, etc. The only difference is that their purpose is self-defense (whether individuals choose to compete or not).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Not really. The focus of boxing is too narrow. MMA training makes a better case but it's still limited because of its focus and the more focussed the individual is on sport the further he gets from SD.


Too narrow for what?


----------



## Hyoho (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Because were not pedants.
> 
> Because exclusive technologies are a barrier to communication outside of the circle of their use.
> 
> Because then you'd get into arguments about what "actually" constitutes a ryu.



Well if you are not pedantic maybe it's best the word ART was dropped. Maybe its best not practiced at all. Because generally a person who does MA is excessively concerned with minor details and rules, displaying academic learning. To try and hand down a tradition. The Japanese concept and psyche is based on it. That's what makes them tick giving it application to other things. 

Those that are in a recognised ryu have no problem distiguishing who is and isnt.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Again my reasoning is not based on what the individuals reasons for practicing are.
> 
> My definition is based on the reason the activity was created.
> 
> ...


MMA was created for fighting, same as any other martial art.It started off as TMA people competing against each other, and evolved in the direction of what worked. 

Even so, your distinction that to be a martial art something had to have been designated as such by some person from antiquity seems a little off and more than a little arbitrary. MMA contains all of the same elements as any other style, is trained basically the same as any other style, and practiced for the same wide variety of reasons as any other style. A martial art is simply a style of hand to hand combat. What you use it for after the fact is neither here nor there.

By the way, to my understanding (open to correction) taichi started out as a set of relaxation exercises that later evolved into a fighting style, which would make it, according to your arbitrary classification, not a martial art.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Good point, DB. It's entirely possible for someone to train for and participate in a sport (MMA, boxing, Judo), training only the moves for that sport, within the rules of that sport, for the purpose of self-defense. And someone teaching/coaching that sport could easily make a few adjustments and teach the sport (while training for the sport, under the rules of the sport) for self-defense.




Eg. Charlie Zelenof.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Not really. The focus of boxing is too narrow. MMA training makes a better case but it's still limited because of its focus and the more focussed the individual is on sport the further he gets from SD.



Wrestling and boxing were origionally designed to prepare people for war.

The Spartans wrestled.

Soldiers wrestle and box now. With a focus of making them better soldiers.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2017)

Ok this is a sport.






Designed to train self defence.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Eg. Charlie Zelenof.


That never gets old, man.


----------



## punisher73 (Oct 5, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Good point, DB. It's entirely possible for someone to train for and participate in a sport (MMA, boxing, Judo), training only the moves for that sport, within the rules of that sport, for the purpose of self-defense. And someone teaching/coaching that sport could easily make a few adjustments and teach the sport (while training for the sport, under the rules of the sport) for self-defense.



I have seen places that do exactly that.  They use the platform of MMA and then "add in" all of the fouls and banned techniques of the sport to round out their curriculum and train in de-escalation, proper usage of force in a self-defense scenario (ie: when it is ok to gouge out an eye).  How is that not a martial art?

All of MMA comes from TMA's, they are found in arts that were designed for self-protection.  Modern boxing was based off of fencing and was taught for protection in London.  As someone else pointed out, the Greeks had "Pankration", the first MMA to train their warriors.

Now, if you REALLY want to get specific with language, then most of what we call "traditional martial arts" in regards to kung fu, karate etc. (the empty hand portions) are NOT martial arts.  They were not designed, taught and used on the battlefield.  But, we know what is meant when we say the term "martial art".  It doesn't apply necessarily to military usage, but also includes personal combat in a self-preservation situation.  Which, MMA falls under.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2017)

By the way fouls have almost nothing to do with turning a sport into a self defence.

It is more about using the skills you have to solve specific problems.


----------



## webmaster786 (Oct 6, 2017)

MMA is not a martial arts . Sports that uses a variety of traditional martial arts techniques.One style does not beat another style. A man bounces another. Usually the best person can win or the individual athlete can adapt well to the set of rules to achieve this sport. Initially, MMA was just a competition. Then, in the context of the MMA rules and context, it was a fight


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

webmaster786 said:


> MMA is not a martial arts . Sports that uses a variety of traditional martial arts techniques.One style does not beat another style. A man bounces another. Usually the best person can win or the individual athlete can adapt well to the set of rules to achieve this sport. Initially, MMA was just a competition. Then, in the context of the MMA rules and context, it was a fight


Would you mind rephrasing this in English?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

drop bear said:


> By the way fouls have almost nothing to do with turning a sport into a self defence.
> 
> It is more about using the skills you have to solve specific problems.


I agree with the "almost nothing". There are really only two significant impacts of rules/fouls: what a competitor need not train to defend (for competition), and what a competitor need not train to use (in competition). It doesn't change the usefulness of what they do train, and the holes they don't train for are not as big as might be supposed against a "normal" person (accepting that those of us who, as you say, like to get punched in the head as a hobby, are not normal). If a boxer's overall defense is good, kicks by an untrained/slightly trained person aren't a game changer - even kicks to the groin.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

webmaster786 said:


> MMA is not a martial arts . Sports that uses a variety of traditional martial arts techniques.One style does not beat another style. A man bounces another. Usually the best person can win or the individual athlete can adapt well to the set of rules to achieve this sport. Initially, MMA was just a competition. Then, in the context of the MMA rules and context, it was a fight


The key word appears in your last two sentences: "was". There are individuals and places that train the "style" that has resulted from the test of that competition, with or without intent to compete. That makes it similar to other things we'd call "martial arts".


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Would you mind rephrasing this in English?


I thought that post was reasonably clear, MD.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, but that means we have to track an activity back to some original purpose. What if the purpose changes? If someone opens a school teaching self-defense using what has been learned from MMA competition (so the "MMA style"), then the purpose of the activity within that school is self-defense. But it's MMA - the exact same things they were practicing at the gym where she trained, using all the same methods, approaches, etc. The only difference is that their purpose is self-defense (whether individuals choose to compete or not).


I explained exactly what I think about this in an earlier post.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I agree with the "almost nothing". There are really only two significant impacts of rules/fouls: what a competitor need not train to defend (for competition), and what a competitor need not train to use (in competition). It doesn't change the usefulness of what they do train, and the holes they don't train for are not as big as might be supposed against a "normal" person (accepting that those of us who, as you say, like to get punched in the head as a hobby, are not normal). If a boxer's overall defense is good, kicks by an untrained/slightly trained person aren't a game changer - even kicks to the groin.



You could fing a few situations where going school yard is pretty much the best option. So say if someone bites you bend their nose back. 

But otherwise it would be things like not getting separated in a gang fight or if your friend gets dropped run over and protect him. That kind of tactical concern that does not really matter if you are doing boxing or judo so long as you are destroying dudes.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> I explained exactly what I think about this in an earlier post.


The reasoning doesn't make sense to me, Dave. Since intent can change, why does some original intent matter? If original intent doesn't matter, then is it not more a matter of the intent of the training?

Or is there something inherent in the development that's the point here? For instance, I could argue (I wouldn't, but it would be a valid argument to make) that something is only a "martial art" if there's more than just fighting involved. I could say it has to include specific training for making someone a better person, and something akin to fighting techniques. If I argued that, we could look at what's taught in any given school and make a judgment of whether they fit that definition. And, again, it could shift quickly.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> The reasoning doesn't make sense to me, Dave. Since intent can change, why does some original intent matter? If original intent doesn't matter, then is it not more a matter of the intent of the training?
> 
> Or is there something inherent in the development that's the point here? For instance, I could argue (I wouldn't, but it would be a valid argument to make) that something is only a "martial art" if there's more than just fighting involved. I could say it has to include specific training for making someone a better person, and something akin to fighting techniques. If I argued that, we could look at what's taught in any given school and make a judgment of whether they fit that definition. And, again, it could shift quickly.



And sports kind of suggest they make better people as well.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Wrestling and boxing were origionally designed to prepare people for war.
> 
> The Spartans wrestled.
> 
> Soldiers wrestle and box now. With a focus of making them better soldiers.



Spartans wrestled for fun, exercise and competition, not on the battlefield. 

Again I think these things are great training and useful additions and even viable self defence methods within a limited context. There is nothing wrong with taking up boxing for self defence reasons. It just doesn't change it from being an activity whose purpose is to entertain.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> MMA was created for fighting, same as any other martial art.It started off as TMA people competing against each other, and evolved in the direction of what worked.
> 
> Even so, your distinction that to be a martial art something had to have been designated as such by some person from antiquity seems a little off and more than a little arbitrary. MMA contains all of the same elements as any other style, is trained basically the same as any other style, and practiced for the same wide variety of reasons as any other style. A martial art is simply a style of hand to hand combat. What you use it for after the fact is neither here nor there.
> 
> By the way, to my understanding (open to correction) taichi started out as a set of relaxation exercises that later evolved into a fighting style, which would make it, according to your arbitrary classification, not a martial art.



Calling something based on its purpose for being is arbitrary? Ok.

Your opening statement contradicts it's self. Was mma created for fighting or for TMA people to compete?

It's an important distinction because if I want to get so maists to compete i write down a set of rules. 
If I want to win a fight i practice attacks and defences that will help.

I don't expect the rulebook I wrote to win a fight and I don't expect a room full of fighters to understand that the fight will be broken into 3 minute rounds when I try and punch them in the face with my fighting techniques.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

drop bear said:


> And sports kind of suggest they make better people as well.


At the sport, on purpose. My intent was to speak to developing traits not directly tied to physical competition. Of course, even that leads to the whole issue of things that don't have to be actively taught, if they are learned lessons from the competition (managing emotions under pressure, etc.).


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Ok this is a sport.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That looks awesome.

But as I said to martial D, I doubt I will get very far by quoting the rules of this new sport at my assailant.

I have no doubt that the training one might do for that sport, or the experience of the sport its self would make me a pretty awesome warrior in real life, especially if I got to some kind of international elite level. 

I look forward to the day someone codifies the methods one must use to survive the real life version of that scenario. That would be a fascinating martial art to learn.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Calling something based on its purpose for being is arbitrary? Ok.


No, but you're ascribing it's purpose arbitrarily. 


> Your opening statement contradicts it's self. Was mma created for fighting or for TMA people to compete?


TMA people trying to prove their art was the best, through fighting each other. What contradiction?



> It's an important distinction because if I want to get so maists to compete i write down a set of rules.
> If I want to win a fight i practice attacks and defences that will help.


For a guy trying to define what something is now based on what it was originally supposed to be(which again, excludes some more traditional styles like taichi), you don't seem to be super informed vis a vis the origins of mma.



> I don't expect the rulebook I wrote to win a fight and I don't expect a room full of fighters to understand that the fight will be broken into 3 minute rounds when I try and punch them in the face with my fighting techniques.



As above. MMA didn't spring fully grown with weight classes, rounds, and rules. Early mma had none of these things, and much of it still doesn't.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I thought that post was reasonably clear, MD.


Not one single sentence of that post is grammatically coherent. I'll concede to your superior broken English comprehension abilities I suppose.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> The reasoning doesn't make sense to me, Dave. Since intent can change, why does some original intent matter? If original intent doesn't matter, then is it not more a matter of the intent of the training?
> 
> Or is there something inherent in the development that's the point here? For instance, I could argue (I wouldn't, but it would be a valid argument to make) that something is only a "martial art" if there's more than just fighting involved. I could say it has to include specific training for making someone a better person, and something akin to fighting techniques. If I argued that, we could look at what's taught in any given school and make a judgment of whether they fit that definition. And, again, it could shift quickly.



If I create a new type of flamethrower meant for immolating people and make 1000 units, does it stop being a weapon of death because you and 5 other guys use it to light your fire place?

I don't think it does.

What I did say was that if 700 people use it as a fire place lighter, I am happy to concede that it's definition has changed for most people, but to me it is still a weapon.

If 990 people use it as a fire lighter and 10 years ago everybody who had one modded my design to make it safer so it was now less suited to immolation and more effective lighting fireplaces AND of the remaining models that were unmodded 8 of 10 no longer work and the last 2 are in storage, well then it's not a weapon anymore it is just a fire lighter.

I think Judo is on the cusp of becoming a fire lighter. TKD is probably more lighter than flamethrower but if I'm discussing the whole art not a specific school, then it's still to me a flamethrower.

You and Martial D are confusing the intent of a practitioner or teacher with the definition of what x ma is. In one breath you ask about something like Taichi, "is taichi a martial art" an art practiced in some form by millions world-wide. In the nect breath you say " mwhat about a guy who does it like this..."

Are you discussing Taichi as a whole or Taichi as done by that guy???

Discussed as a whole I call Taichi a martial art because the origin of the art that I heard was of a fighting art and it is still widely practiced as such. Perhaps not a majority do Taichi as fighting art but enough that the combative element is not extinct. 

incidentally basing a martial art on relaxation exercises doesn't change the fact that you were building a martial art when you did so. if I followed that rationale I would be saying arts cannot evolve into sports, which is the opposite of what I said.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> If I create a new type of flamethrower meant for immolating people and make 1000 units, does it stop being a weapon of death because you and 5 other guys use it to light your fire place?
> 
> I don't think it does.


What DOES happen, is it actually ALSO becomes a fireplace lighter. Nobody is arguing that MMA ceases to become a sport. We're pointing out that there's not a binary choice here.



> What I did say was that if 700 people use it as a fire place lighter, I am happy to concede that it's definition has changed for most people, but to me it is still a weapon.
> 
> If 990 people use it as a fire lighter and 10 years ago everybody who had one modded my design to make it safer so it was now less suited to immolation and more effective lighting fireplaces AND of the remaining models that were unmodded 8 of 10 no longer work and the last 2 are in storage, well then it's not a weapon anymore it is just a fire lighter.


That's requiring a binary choice (for you). That's simply not the case. There's plenty of overlap between sport and MA - we see it in any art that focuses on SD, but also competes. Tomiki Aikido would be a good example.



> I think Judo is on the cusp of becoming a fire lighter. TKD is probably more lighter than flamethrower but if I'm discussing the whole art not a specific school, then it's still to me a flamethrower.
> 
> You and Martial D are confusing the intent of a practitioner or teacher with the definition of what x ma is. In one breath you ask about something like Taichi, "is taichi a martial art" an art practiced in some form by millions world-wide. In the nect breath you say " mwhat about a guy who does it like this..."


I don't think we are. We are pointing out that a thing need not be one or the other. It can be both, either at the same time (as with the example of Tomiki Aikido), or each separately, in different locations.



> Are you discussing Taichi as a whole or Taichi as done by that guy???
> 
> Discussed as a whole I call Taichi a martial art because the origin of the art that I heard was of a fighting art and it is still widely practiced as such. Perhaps not a majority do Taichi as fighting art but enough that the combative element is not extinct.
> 
> incidentally basing a martial art on relaxation exercises doesn't change the fact that you were building a martial art when you did so. if I followed that rationale I would be saying arts cannot evolve into sports, which is the opposite of what I said.


I've said nothing about Taichi.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> If I create a new type of flamethrower meant for immolating people and make 1000 units, does it stop being a weapon of death because you and 5 other guys use it to light your fire place?
> 
> I don't think it does.
> 
> ...


What about a car? That absolutely is a weapon, but at the same time it's a tool to drive around. Same with some martial arts...they can have multiple purposes.
Or, as one of my friends says, por que no los dos?


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> What about a car? That absolutely is a weapon, but at the same time it's a tool to drive around. Same with some martial arts...they can have multiple purposes.
> Or, as one of my friends says, por que no los dos?


to be fair absolutely ANYTHING,can be a weapon if you use it as such, cotton bud in the eye, very nasty


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> No, but you're ascribing it's purpose arbitrarily.



I don't see how?



> TMA people trying to prove their art was the best, through fighting each other. What contradiction?



So the TMA people competed to find who was best. And in trying to work who was best the codified a set of tactics and techniques and called it mma? 
Or did they codify a set of rules to enable that competition to happen and call that mma?

My understanding is that it is the latter.



> For a guy trying to define what something is now based on what it was originally supposed to be(which again, excludes some more traditional styles like taichi), you don't seem to be super informed vis a vis the origins of mma.



I didn't know I needed to be. I gave an opinion based on what I believed was true. If I'm wrong about the origin of mma then so be it, this is hardly an emotional topic for me. 
But yours is the first suggestion I've encountered that differs on that topic. 





> As above. MMA didn't spring fully grown with weight classes, rounds, and rules. Early mma had none of these things, and much of it still doesn't.



But the old had one thing in common with the modern... They were competitions.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

Yes, there are mma competitions, just as there are karate competitions, Mui Thai competitions, boxing competitions, street fighter 3 competitions, and pie eating competitions. You can compete at almost anything.

That says nothing of what they are competing at, nor does it make the activity a sport. 

Here's a question. If the first karate guys had held a competition before they used it in the field, would that in any way change the classification of what it is now?

Would it suddenly become not a martial art even though the activity was identical?


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Yes, there are mma competitions, just as there are karate competitions, Mui Thai competitions, boxing competitions, street fighter 3 competitions, and pie eating competitions. You can compete at almost anything.
> 
> That says nothing of what they are competing at, nor does it make the activity a sport.
> 
> ...


i am for once in complete agreement with you. The arbitrary defintion that ma are only ma if they have been at sometime in the last few thousand years been used on a battlefield is just plain silly


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Yes, there are mma competitions, just as there are karate competitions, Mui Thai competitions, boxing competitions, street fighter 3 competitions, and pie eating competitions. You can compete at almost anything.
> 
> That says nothing of what they are competing at, nor does it make the activity a sport.
> 
> ...


If there's no martial art, just a competition, what are they competing at?


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> If there's no martial art, just a competition, what are they competing at?


EXACTLY.

So just what do mma people compete at?


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2017)

webmaster786 said:


> A man bounces another



Mmm intriguing and very possibly not a martial art, a marital one perhaps?



Martial D said:


> So just what do mma people compete at?



*At* nothing. They compete *in *whatever.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2017)

I find it funny watching non MMA people trying to define what it is. Perhaps let MMA people define what they do... if they want to?


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I find it funny watching non MMA people trying to define what it is. Perhaps let MMA people define what they do... if they want to?



Well feel free to correct any misconceptions I may have.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> EXACTLY.
> 
> So just what do mma people compete at?


They compete at mma. Mma is a competition where people try to hit or submit one another.

Just as you can't have a karate tournament unless you already have karate, you can't have an mma tournament without having martial arts to mix.

But jujitsu is jujitsu, not mma. karate is karate and so on. MMA is the competition format unless I am mistaken?

If someone has codified a set of techniques and strategies and called it mma and this codified art is what is taught at mma gyms then I am indeed very much mistaken. 

If not then I don't really get your point?


----------



## Steve (Oct 6, 2017)

I just had a thought. 

@DaveB  is suggesting that MMA is a sport, and so cannot be a martial art.  The two are mutually exclusive.  It's true that a dog will never be a cat, even though both animals might crap on your floor.  They might both be floor crappers, but a shitzu will never be a calico.  In the same way, MMA, as a sport, just is a different thing.  Is that true, DaveB?  I'm sincerely not trying to put words in your mouth, but to sum up. 

If this is somewhat true, my confusion, and maybe some other people, is that this is independent of application.  If sport and martial art are different creatures, this would be true regardless of application.  A sport that is trained and used for self defense would not be a martial art because it is a sport.  Period.  Trying to justify your perspective beyond this just muddies the waters. 

@gpseymour suggests that a style can be both a sport and a martial art.  That the two are not mutually exclusive.  He's not too worried about distinguishing between a sport or a martial art.  For him, the key is application, which as I explained above, is really irrelevant to DaveB.  So, a dog that craps on the floor or a cat that craps on the floor.  The salient point is that they are both crapping on the floor.  And the end result, even though both are coming at it from different directions, is a stinky room. 

@DaveB I said before, I think you're a smart dude, but I predict that your perspective will soften over time.  You have some interesting ideas that I appreciate.  The reality, though, is that martial arts styles are both too inbred and also too diverse to make it easy to apply binary reasoning to them.  They are not all one thing or another.  Usually, they're some combination of both.


----------



## Steve (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> They compete at mma. Mma is a competition where people try to hit or submit one another.
> 
> Just as you can't have a karate tournament unless you already have karate, you can't have an mma tournament without having martial arts to mix.
> 
> ...


I think 10 years ago, this would have been true.  Today?  I think it's both.  People train karate for the competition just as people train MMA for the self defense.  People train both for fitness and fun, and a host of other reasons that have little to do with either competition or self defense.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> They compete at mma



Nope, they compete *in* MMA. The people on this thread seem to want correct English. 



DaveB said:


> Well feel free to correct any misconceptions I may have.



Why does it matter to non MMA people whether it's a style or not? People who train and compete in MMA are happy with what they do, so why do non MMA people feel they have to argue about what it is? It seems quite weird that some want it to be a style, other's a sport and yet more others don't want it to exist.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> They compete at mma. Mma is a competition where people try to hit or submit one another.
> 
> Just as you can't have a karate tournament unless you already have karate, you can't have an mma tournament without having martial arts to mix.
> 
> ...



But this eases a deeper question, I'm in the middle of designing my own version of karate, i do this bit by bit, week by week as i slightly and some times substantial change the techneque to suit me, and my body type and my pluses and weakness. I'm big with long arms and legs, a lot of the close quarter stuff doesn't suit me, I like to fight at range, some of it doesn't fit my range of motion particularly going low or high kicks. With in half a dozen runs I've redesigned it , to work for me.

my insteucter leaves me to it, though once in a while says, " very good joe, but its not actually karate"  but it is, ! I learned it at a karate class, its far more effective for me, than something designed for the body shape of ancient Asian people.

so is what I'm doing karate or not?


----------



## Steve (Oct 6, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Nope, they compete *in* MMA. The people on this thread seem to want correct English.
> 
> 
> 
> Why does it matter to non MMA people whether it's a style or not? People who train and compete in MMA are happy with what they do, so why do non MMA people feel they have to argue about what it is? It seems quite weird that some want it to be a style, other's a sport and yet more others don't want it to exist.


Just a guess, but I think it's because we're on a discussion forum where people discuss things, and the topic at hand is whether MMA has evolved into a discrete style or not.  It's a topic that comes up every few years.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> They compete at mma. Mma is a competition where people try to hit or submit one another.
> 
> Just as you can't have a karate tournament unless you already have karate, you can't have an mma tournament without having martial arts to mix.
> 
> ...


You can enter an MMA tournament doing just karate, just wrestling, just boxing, etc. You'll lose, but you can do it. MMA is just a catch all term for fighting at all ranges, and the current state of the art(for those that don't want to get murked) reflects that.

Still, we see exceptionally talented specialists(Wonderboy, Verdun, Maia etc) having some success.

So are you prepared to concede that any and all fighting styles that were not originally designated for war(Tai chi, aikido, etc)  are not actually martial arts?  You sort of have to to remain consistent.


----------



## Steve (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> But this eases a deeper question, I'm in the middle of designing my own version of karate, i do this bit by bit, week by week as i slightly and some times substantial change the techneque to suit me, and my body type and my pluses and weakness. I'm big with long arms and legs, a lot of the close quarter stuff doesn't suit me, I like to fight at range, some of it doesn't fit my range of motion particularly going low or high kicks. With in half a dozen runs I've redesigned it , to work for me.
> 
> my insteucter leaves me to it, though once in a while says, " very good joe, but its not actually karate"  but it is, ! I learned it at a karate class, its far more effective for me, than something designed for the body shape of ancient Asian people.
> 
> so is what I'm doing karate or not?


At some point, if you veer off too far, it's not going to be karate any more.  It might be a martial art, though.  Or a sport.  Or both


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> But this eases a deeper question, I'm in the middle of designing my own version of karate, i do this bit by bit, week by week as i slightly and some times substantial change the techneque to suit me, and my body type and my pluses and weakness. I'm big with long arms and legs, a lot of the close quarter stuff doesn't suit me, I like to fight at range, some of it doesn't fit my range of motion particularly going low or high kicks. With in half a dozen runs I've redesigned it , to work for me.
> 
> my insteucter leaves me to it, though once in a while says, " very good joe, but its not actually karate"  but it is, ! I learned it at a karate class, its far more effective for me, than something designed for the body shape of ancient Asian people.
> 
> so is what I'm doing karate or not?


I would say yes. 
I think your instructor probably means it's not the karate you paid him to teach you, but especially in karate your art is supposed to become your own.

Unless he just thinks your not ready for that yet.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

Look at the emergence of esports(competitive video games).

At the point you begin to compete in competitions, are you no longer playing video games?

If you win a pie eating competition, will your **** be a different color and texture than the person that just ate a lot of pie because they were hungry?


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> You can enter an MMA tournament doing just karate, just wrestling, just boxing, etc. You'll lose, but you can do it. MMA is just a catch all term for fighting at all ranges, and the current state of the art(for those that don't want to get murked) reflects that.
> 
> Still, we see exceptionally talented specialists(Wonderboy, Verdun, Maia etc) having some success.
> 
> So are you prepared to concede that any and all fighting styles that were not originally designated for war(Tai chi, aikido, etc)  are not actually martial arts?  You sort of have to to remain consistent.



Yes, but consistent with what I actually said as opposed to what you think I said.

I'm pretty sure I used the phrases "dealing with violence" and "self defence". To my knowledge both those arts and all TMA meet that criteria. 

But since you've conceded finally that mma is a ruleset or group of rulesets, not a single codified method for dealing with violence (also known as a martial art) it seems my point is made.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> I would say yes.
> I think your instructor probably means it's not the karate you paid him to teach you, but especially in karate your art is supposed to become your own.
> 
> Unless he just thinks your not ready for that yet.


thanks so do I, it's rather were he leaves me practising a,skill, where i grab a punch, pull and put on a wrist lock and he returns to find I'm practising dodging the punch and kicking my partner in the chest instead. coz his is silly and mine works.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Yes, but consistent with what I actually said as opposed to what you think I said.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I used the phrases "dealing with violence" and "self defence". To my knowledge both those arts and all TMA meet that criteria.
> 
> But since you've conceded finally that mma is a ruleset or group of rulesets, not a single codified method for dealing with violence (also known as a martial art) it seems my point is made.


Again, Tai chi wasn't originally created to deal with violence. 

And again, mma meets your rate arbitrary criteria of 'dealing with violence' and 'self defense'.

But I feel like you will again ignore this. Your prejudice against mma seems impervious to reason.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Steve said:


> I just had a thought.
> 
> @DaveB  is suggesting that MMA is a sport, and so cannot be a martial art.  The two are mutually exclusive.  It's true that a dog will never be a cat, even though both animals might crap on your floor.  They might both be floor crappers, but a shitzu will never be a calico.  In the same way, MMA, as a sport, just is a different thing.  Is that true, DaveB?  I'm sincerely not trying to put words in your mouth, but to sum up.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the compliment Steve, and for trying to understand.

I don't consider my position to be a binary one. There is indeed a sport called Taekwondo. But if I train everyday to win a taekwondo match and nothing else, I will not pass the belt grading for ANY Taekwondo martial art rank.

Yet I can go to classes to learn the martial art called Taekwondo, pass my grading and still fight in the tournament.

The word Taekwondo can be both sport and Martial art. Hell the martial art Taekwondo can be both sport and Martial art.

But the sport of Taekwondo cannot be the martial art. One is bigger both in content and in scope than the other.

And if I train in only the sport of tkd but with the intent to learn self defence, I would have done myself a disservice by not training appropriately to my goals and my knowledge in my chosen area will be lacking.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> If you win a pie eating competition, will your **** be a different color and texture than the person that just ate a lot of pie because they were hungry?



I have no idea what you are talking about.






Martial D said:


> Again, Tai chi wasn't originally created to deal with violence.



Actually I think you will find it was. A History of Tai Chi Chuan


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I have no idea what you are talking about.



That competing at a thing does not change the nature of the thing.







> Actually I think you will find it was. A History of Tai Chi Chuan



Well, that blurb is very abridged. Many years ago, I read a rather interesting book entitled 'a history of Chinese martial arts'(or something similar, I'll see if I can dig it out of my collection) that claims taichi evolved out of a set of relaxation exercises.

But even if that were not true, would that change the nature of what it is NOW?


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> But even if that were not true, would that change the nature of what it is NOW?



It's not 'blurb' btw and there is a list of citations you can follow up. It's from Stanford University's group so I imagine they are as meticulous about the accuracy of the history of their style as they are about their academic studies.

I'm not going to argue CMA with you but I will tell you I have seen Tai Chi used as a martial art. It was very from from being a slow 'relaxation' style.


----------



## Steve (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Thanks for the compliment Steve, and for trying to understand.
> 
> I don't consider my position to be a binary one. There is indeed a sport called Taekwondo. But if I train everyday to win a taekwondo match and nothing else, I will not pass the belt grading for ANY Taekwondo martial art rank.
> 
> ...


I get it.  Here's a question, though.  If self defense is the goal, wouldn't limiting oneself to any curriculum, whether sport or martial art, be dangerously limiting?

Another question, do you think it's possible for a sport to have a more complete curriculum than a martial art (using both terms as you define them)?


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Again, Tai chi wasn't originally created to deal with violence.
> 
> And again, mma meets your rate arbitrary criteria of 'dealing with violence' and 'self defense'.
> 
> But I feel like you will again ignore this. Your prejudice against mma seems impervious to reason.


LOL

Now that's hilarious. 

In trying to call out my bias you reveal your own. I attach ZERO negative value to the term sport. To me this discussion is like asking is a hammer a nail? Related items but different, 

As for your claims about Taichi, I'll happily concede the point of you have something other than your word.
And you already admitted mma is a group of rulesets not an ma.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Yes, but consistent with what I actually said as opposed to what you think I said.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I used the phrases "dealing with violence" and "self defence". To my knowledge both those arts and all TMA meet that criteria.
> 
> But since you've conceded finally that mma is a ruleset or group of rulesets, not a single codified method for dealing with violence (also known as a martial art) it seems my point is made.



MMA meets that criteria as well. You have gone back to whether MMA is a rule set or a style. It is both.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

Steve said:


> At some point, if you veer off too far, it's not going to be karate any more.  It might be a martial art, though.  Or a sport.  Or both


it will be what ever i choose to call it, there is no defintion of karate that would automatically exclude jofu karate, from being karate.


----------



## Steve (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> it will be what ever i choose to call it, there is no defintion of karate that would automatically exclude jofu karate, from being karate.


This goes back to another thread.  You can call a dog a cat, but that doesn't make it one.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> thanks so do I, it's rather were he leaves me practising a,skill, where i grab a punch, pull and put on a wrist lock and he returns to find I'm practising dodging the punch and kicking my partner in the chest instead. coz his is silly and mine works.



In that case you should train something else where you have a teacher that you respect.


----------



## Encho (Oct 6, 2017)

Hi martial D,
Supposedly, Chen style evolved from a combination of things with Chen wanting.
Chen style was largely a long fist style from what I recall and wanting added daoyin, and other stuff from manuals to the Chen form resulting in what is regarded as Chen taijiquan.  I think in my opinion what was created in terms of usage depends on what the student is after, since taijiquan offers all of it making it a unique art to study.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> In that case you should train something else where you have a teacher that you respect.


i do respect him, just a lot of the syllabus doesn't suit me, why would a do a dainty thee step move to me the right to put a wrist lock on, when i can kick his knee from right where i am,,,, ?


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

Martial D said:


> That competing at a thing does not change the nature of the thing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Neither point is my argument.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

drop bear said:


> MMA meets that criteria as well. You have gone back to whether MMA is a rule set or a style. It is both.


ok.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> i do respect him, just a lot of the syllabus doesn't suit me, why would a do a dainty thee step move to me the right to put a wrist lock on, when i can kick his knee from right where i am,,,, ?



In order to learn and practice the lock and an entry to it.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> In order to learn and practice the lock and an entry to it.


but why? in any sort of combat, I'm never going to pass up a chance to smash someone's knee in order to, to spend 3seconds getting them in a wrist lock that's if i can even pull the lock off, put them down, fast and then deal with anything else that arises, giving up a high % move for a low % move, that still leaves me vulrable to a,second attacker is folly


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> but why? in any sort of combat, I'm never going to pass up a chance to smash someone's knee in order to, to spend 3seconds getting them in a wrist lock that's if i can even pull the lock off, put them down, fast and then deal with anything else that arises, giving up a high % move for a low % move, that still leaves me vulrable to a,second attacker is folly



Which begs the question if that lock is not for self defence are you doing a martial art?


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Which begs the question if that lock is not for self defence are you doing a martial art?


locks generaly are a poor techneque, they put me in a wrist lock,, it depends on the relative strengh of the parties and their pain threshold,,, i just straighten my arm,not many people are strong enough to keep the lock on, or if that fails i a grab them by the,Adams apple and squeeze, I'm betting they let go of my arm before i let go of their throat,


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> If someone has codified a set of techniques and strategies and called it mma and this codified art is what is taught at mma gyms then I am indeed very much mistaken.


This is a point I brought up some time ago, Dave. People do go to MMA gyms and train MMA. Not all gyms see it that way - some still have classes/sessions in individual background styles, which they then combine. In that case, it's still the component arts, IMO. But some go in and train in "stand up fighting" and "ground fighting" (sometimes not even separate tracks - just which you work on that day), each of those being a component of the overall strategy and tactics they train for the competition. They are, in fact, training a style that some (maybe all) of them refer to as MMA. It is a mixture of martial arts, so the name even still works. So, just like there are Karate tournaments (sport), one can also train in Karate (martial art) - the same is true of MMA now.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Nope, they compete *in* MMA. The people on this thread seem to want correct English.
> 
> 
> 
> Why does it matter to non MMA people whether it's a style or not? People who train and compete in MMA are happy with what they do, so why do non MMA people feel they have to argue about what it is? It seems quite weird that some want it to be a style, other's a sport and yet more others don't want it to exist.


It's an intellectual argument, Tez. Not one of any real consequence - more philosophical. It certainly (so far as I can see) expresses no judgment about the people or the sport/art/style/competition/whatever.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

Steve said:


> At some point, if you veer off too far, it's not going to be karate any more.  It might be a martial art, though.  Or a sport.  Or both


Ahh - I see what you did there, Steve.

Seriously, it need not stop being Karate - it might just be a new style of Karate. There are some very different approaches to things within what most of us would call "Karate". Someday I'll start a thread (about as meaningful as this one, and sure to be equally unanimous) on how much of a change it takes to make something "no longer that".


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> thanks so do I, it's rather were he leaves me practising a,skill, where i grab a punch, pull and put on a wrist lock and he returns to find I'm practising dodging the punch and kicking my partner in the chest instead. coz his is silly and mine works.


If you don't want to learn what he's teaching, why are you there? I'm quite serious in this. Many times, the techniques people think won't work for one reason or another, they simply aren't understanding the "entry" to the technique (what makes it available, so it makes sense). Some techniques require a specific availability (locks off of punches are definitely among those). If you don't like that approach, why are you in that class? When you go off-topic, you hinder your partner's learning (much of learning grappling is feeling it done to you).


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> It's an intellectual argument



Mmm 'intellectual' you say, let me know when that starts please.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> Thanks for the compliment Steve, and for trying to understand.
> 
> I don't consider my position to be a binary one. There is indeed a sport called Taekwondo. But if I train everyday to win a taekwondo match and nothing else, I will not pass the belt grading for ANY Taekwondo martial art rank.
> 
> ...


Okay, so let's change one thing. Take the forms out of TKD. It's still the same art in every other way. Now, there's no reason I know of you couldn't train for the competition, and still pass grading. The same, I think would be true for Judo. It would certainly seem be true for BJJ, at least in those branches where they don't have a self-defense curriculum that is required.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> i do respect him, just a lot of the syllabus doesn't suit me, why would a do a dainty thee step move to me the right to put a wrist lock on, when i can kick his knee from right where i am,,,, ?


To learn that tool. The three steps are just getting you to where the technique actually starts.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 6, 2017)

DaveB said:


> LOL
> 
> And you already admitted mma is a group of rulesets not an ma.



I  certainly did not. It's a martial art that is sometimes used for competition, just as karate, judo, mui thai, etc etc.

I feel as though I am talking to a wall.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> locks generaly are a poor techneque, they put me in a wrist lock,, it depends on the relative strengh of the parties and their pain threshold,,, i just straighten my arm,not many people are strong enough to keep the lock on, or if that fails i a grab them by the,Adams apple and squeeze, I'm betting they let go of my arm before i let go of their throat,


No...Locks are generally poor primary actions.
If one is using a lock as a primary action they probably don't understand the when to use it. Someone arguing against drilling the catch and lock actions also doesn't understand the when.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> but why? in any sort of combat, I'm never going to pass up a chance to smash someone's knee in order to, to spend 3seconds getting them in a wrist lock that's if i can even pull the lock off, put them down, fast and then deal with anything else that arises, giving up a high % move for a low % move, that still leaves me vulrable to a,second attacker is folly


So why train an art that has so much you won't use?


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

Danny T said:


> No...Locks are generally poor primary actions.
> If one is using a lock as a primary action they probably don't understand the when to use it. Someone arguing against drilling the catch and lock actions also doesn't understand the when.


there isn't ever a when, if i can put a wrist lock on i can do something else far more immediate and devastating, we had another one, where you had them bent over with their arm out, that you then wrist locked up their back, in that position i can take my choice of blows, my instinct would be to kick them in the face like a goalie kick, in what situation would i find myself in where a wrist lock it better?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> locks generaly are a poor techneque, they put me in a wrist lock,, it depends on the relative strengh of the parties and their pain threshold,,, i just straighten my arm,not many people are strong enough to keep the lock on, or if that fails i a grab them by the,Adams apple and squeeze, I'm betting they let go of my arm before i let go of their throat,


Actually, most locks don't require pain compliance. If you're powering through them either 1) they haven't applied it correctly, or 2) they aren't willing to hurt a training partner, so they let up. Only in exceptional cases does strength overcome a proper lock once it is aplied.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> So why train an art that has so much you won't use?


because it has a lot that i will, if the move is counter initiative to me, then i discard it, i may come back latter? What matters in the,short term is that i become better ay the moves that come easily to me, my motor patterns are old and well ingrained, they are not easy to over right, i try and try to learn a move, when i do it in real time i do something else, which is ok if what i do is effective


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> because it has a lot that i will, if the move is counter initiative to me, then i discard it, i may come back latter? What matters in the,short term is that i become better ay the moves that come easily to me, my motor patterns are old and well ingrained, they are not easy to over right, i try and try to learn a move, when i do it in real time i do something else, which is ok if what i do is effective


That last part I agree with entirely. Only in drills is it pretty important to stay on the task at hand. So, if you're supposed to be practicing a given technique, that's what should be happening. When you're just responding to attacks, it's time to let the fastest reactions win.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Actually, most locks don't require pain compliance. If you're powering through them either 1) they haven't applied it correctly, or 2) they aren't willing to hurt a training partner, so they let up. Only in exceptional cases does strength overcome a proper lock once it is aplied.


your a lock man, i have no doubt that your are not easy to break, but people cant put me in locks as i pull me arm away hard and if they do, i find it easy to just straighten my arm out,
i can lift 300lbs, !,


----------



## Danny T (Oct 6, 2017)

I don't know your particular circumstance.
I've actually used some of what I learned from training wrist and arm locks but you have all the answers already. Within your answers you have no reason to know them and have your mind made up. So you are correct they are a waste of time.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> To learn that tool. The three steps are just getting you to where the technique actually starts.


no three steps are taking me from a safe position to his right, in to range of his other hand or foot, i fight from distance, there o's no point having long arms and legs, if i move in to his range to put a lock on


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

Danny T said:


> I don't know your particular circumstance.
> I've actually used some of what I learned from training wrist and arm locks but you have all the answers already. Within your answers you have no reason to know them and have your mind made up. So you are correct they are a waste of time.


I've put a proposition up for discussion, but you are,right, I'm pretty confined by my point, for someone else they may be a,sound techneque, for me that just slow down the attack


----------



## Danny T (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> I've put a proposition up for discussion, but you are,right, I'm pretty confined by my point, for someone else they may be a,sound techneque, for me that just slow down the attack


Discussion can happen only if the parties are open to and willing to discuss. You being confined by your point makes discussion mute.
However I will throw out:
LEO's use them often. Bouncers/Doormen as well. In some close quarter weapon countering. And that understanding how they work, when they work, where one needs to be for them to work; allows countering and re-countering in terms of timing and positioning not requiring the strength or effort of picking up 300lbs.

Oh...also that they are your attack again shows you don't know the how or understand the when to use them.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> your a lock man, i have no doubt that your are not easy to break, but people cant put me in locks as i pull me arm away hard and if they do, i find it easy to just straighten my arm out,
> i can lift 300lbs, !,


It is most probably a case of using a specific lock in the wrong situation. A big size/strength difference can be one of those situations with some locks. But in drills, they don’t get to choose the technique.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> no three steps are taking me from a safe position to his right, in to range of his other hand or foot, i fight from distance, there o's no point having long arms and legs, if i move in to his range to put a lock on


I don’t know the specific technique, but many techniques in TMA have an artificial entry built in. If you don’t know the situation it’s meant to
create/mimic, it can seem senseless. I cover this a lot with students who have some training or ability coming in. You are there to collect tools to cover more options and situations. Just because the initial presentation doesn’t make sense to you, that doesn’t mean you wouldn’t find the applications useful.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I don’t know the specific technique, but many techniques in TMA have an artificial entry built in. If you don’t know the situation it’s meant to
> create/mimic, it can seem senseless. I cover this a lot with students who have some training or ability coming in. You are there to collect tools to cover more options and situations. Just because the initial presentation doesn’t make sense to you, that doesn’t mean you wouldn’t find the applications useful.


we practise it for an hour and a half,I'm  clunky to say the least, that will not ever be useful until i can exicuted it with speed and precision, that's at a speed and with a precision that makes him incapable  faster than he can jab me in the eye with his free hand, and i can do that with as close to a 100% certainty as its possible to get, that's even allowing that he hasn't got arms like Popeye and just breaks the lock leaving me a sitting duck right in his range


----------



## Danny T (Oct 6, 2017)

Applying wrist locks or disarms
Rule #1
Never Attempt to apply a wrist lock or a disarm if the hand or the head is operating properly.

Rule #2
The counter is Always simpler and easier that the lock.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

Danny T said:


> Discussion can happen only if the parties are open to and willing to discuss. You being confined by your point makes discussion mute.
> However I will throw out:
> LEO's use them often. Bouncers/Doormen as well. In some close quarter weapon countering. And that understanding how they work, when they work, where one needs to be for them to work; allows countering and re-countering in terms of timing and positioning not requiring the strength or effort of picking up 300lbs.
> 
> Oh...also that they are your attack again shows you don't know the how or understand the when to use them.


discussions,can only really happen when there are different points of view, other wise on says his piece and the other one agrees, that's more a monologues than a discussion. 

that they work for SOME people isn't in debate, I'm sure a 250 lb bouncer can get one on, after he has smashed him into the wall a few times, the question you should a dress is could a 140 lb male put on one the 250 lb weight training steroid using bouncer, if the answer is probably not, and they are only useful if you are fighting weak people, then they are at best suspect


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> discussions,can only really happen when there are different points of view, other wise on says his piece and the other one agrees, that's more a monologues than a discussion.
> 
> that they work for SOME people isn't in debate, I'm sure a 250 lb bouncer can get one on, after he has smashed him into the wall a few times, the question you should a dress is could a 140 lb male put on one the 250 lb weight training steroid using bouncer, if the answer is probably not, and they are only useful if you are fighting weak people, then they are at best suspect


I'm a pretty small guy. I make a lot of locks work, because I know when NOT to use them.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I'm a pretty small guy. I make a lot of locks work, because I know when NOT to use them.


but i say again, your a master of locks, you've spent a life time on them, I've spent an hour and a half, well ten minutes really, before i decieded they aren't for me, but the question remains, if dealing with an attacker, why would i even try it, if i can from the same position smash hos knee so he can no longer stand, , that's a 100% techneque


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> but i say again, your a master of locks, you've spent a life time on them, I've spent an hour and a half, well ten minutes really, before i decieded they aren't for me,


But if I stopped after an hour and a half (much less 10 minutes), I'd be awful at them. No technique is independently dependable after 10 minutes (absent some individual ability that manifests in that technique).



> but the question remains, if dealing with an attacker, why would i even try it, if i can from the same position smash hos knee so he can no longer stand, , that's a 100% techneque


Because it's a useful option in some situations. Taking out a knee isn't nearly so foolproof as your statement suggests.


----------



## jobo (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> But if I stopped after an hour and a half (much less 10 minutes), I'd be awful at them. No technique is independently dependable after 10 minutes (absent some individual ability that manifests in that technique).
> 
> 
> Because it's a useful option in some situations. Taking out a knee isn't nearly so foolproof as your statement suggests.


 if I've got a clean shot at a knee, the guy is going over,that's pretty well guaranteed, locks are a small part of the sylibus, we may get back to them in a month or two,,,,  , as its of no benefit me spending an hour or so practising them , i decided to bother at all and practise something else that was of benefit . My partner got very upset, he was expecting to be wrist locked but kept ending up on the floor,

to paraphrase Bruce lee, id rather have one techneque that I'm good at than a,1000 I'm poor at


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> if I've got a clean shot at a knee, the guy is going over,that's pretty well guaranteed, locks are a small part of the sylibus, we may get back to them in a month or two,,,,  , as its of no benefit me spending an hour or so practising them , i decided to bother at all and practise something else that was of benefit . My partner got very upset, he was expecting to be wrist locked but kept ending up on the floor,
> 
> to paraphrase Bruce lee, id rather have one techneque that I'm good at than a,1000 I'm poor at


About the knee, a few comments. First, that's an "IF". Second, an assured takedown assumes he doesn't do anything to spoil it (again, that issue of a resisting opponent). To take the extreme point, there are styles that particularly train to defend against that, either by removing weight from the leg, or by entirely moving the leg out of the way of the strike. And if your balance is disrupted even a little, there's no guarantee that strike will take him down, even if it lands. Nothing is 100%. Ever.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> discussions,can only really happen when there are different points of view, other wise on says his piece and the other one agrees, that's more a monologues than a discussion.


 A monologue is something stated by one person. A discussion can be had without having a different point of view went one is lacking knowledge or understanding when another is open to gaining more in-depth perspective.



jobo said:


> that they work for SOME people isn't in debate, I'm sure a 250 lb bouncer can get one on, after he has smashed him into the wall a few times, the question you should a dress is could a 140 lb male put on one the 250 lb weight training steroid using bouncer, if the answer is probably not, and they are only useful if you are fighting weak people, then they are at best suspect


After only spending 10 minutes. You have the answers.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> but i say again, your a master of locks, you've spent a life time on them, I've spent an hour and a half, well ten minutes really, before i decieded they aren't for me, but the question remains, if dealing with an attacker, why would i even try it, if i can from the same position smash hos knee so he can no longer stand, , that's a 100% techneque


What if you're fighting someone with prosthetic legs, smashing their knee may not work. There legs also might be too dangerous for you to stay and try to strike them. so you go around and put a lock, they can't use their fancy shmancy legs, and are stuck.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 6, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> It is most probably a case of using a specific lock in the wrong situation. A big size/strength difference can be one of those situations with some locks. But in drills, they don’t get to choose the technique.



They are legitimately low percentage.

Especially if the other guy wants to throw bombs.


----------



## jobo (Oct 7, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> What if you're fighting someone with prosthetic legs, smashing their knee may not work. There legs also might be too dangerous for you to stay and try to strike them. so you go around and put a lock, they can't use their fancy shmancy legs, and are stuck.


people with fake  legs are remarkably easy to knock over sometimes they fall over in a mild wind


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2017)

drop bear said:


> They are legitimately low percentage.
> 
> Especially if the other guy wants to throw bombs.


While he's doing that, it's one of those wrong situations I'm talking about. They have their place, and are useful there. I prefer not to stand in range and tie up my second hand in most situations. I don't really like getting punched in the face. Most standing locks I know should be used with a bit of an "arm drag" element, too, to gain more control.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> people with fake  legs are remarkably easy to knock over sometimes they fall over in a mild wind


Artificial legs are neither terribly dangerous to kick, nor are their users quite that easy to knock over of they've been using them a while.


----------



## jobo (Oct 7, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Artificial legs are neither terribly dangerous to kick, nor are their users quite that easy to knock over of they've been using them a while.


my friend with a fake leg, falls over if he stands on a crisp packet


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 7, 2017)

Learning to walk again through karate | Gisoku Budo - musings of an amputee martial artist

Losing a leg is no bar to martial arts expert Damon

Prosthetics company helps amputees find better fit

One-Legged Fighter Makes Martial Arts History

We currently have a ParaOlympic athlete competing in Strictly Come Dancing and it's impossible to tell he has a prosthetic leg when he's wearing trousers, his dancing is extremely good. It doesn't take any imagination to think he would also do well in martial arts.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 7, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> While he's doing that, it's one of those wrong situations I'm talking about. They have their place, and are useful there. I prefer not to stand in range and tie up my second hand in most situations. I don't really like getting punched in the face. Most standing locks I know should be used with a bit of an "arm drag" element, too, to gain more control.



Yeah but if we were saying self defence. Locks may not be optimally geared towards success. Low percentage and you need some pretty specific curcumstances for them to be the best response.

Now this goes to the origional premis of what is a martial art. If it is not geared towards self defence it is not one aparently.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 7, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> This is a point I brought up some time ago, Dave. People do go to MMA gyms and train MMA. Not all gyms see it that way - some still have classes/sessions in individual background styles, which they then combine. In that case, it's still the component arts, IMO. But some go in and train in "stand up fighting" and "ground fighting" (sometimes not even separate tracks - just which you work on that day), each of those being a component of the overall strategy and tactics they train for the competition. They are, in fact, training a style that some (maybe all) of them refer to as MMA. It is a mixture of martial arts, so the name even still works. So, just like there are Karate tournaments (sport), one can also train in Karate (martial art) - the same is true of MMA now.



Fair enough. 

Someone earlier mentioned that this training is sometimes steered towards self defence and supplemented with extra-sport skills. Combining those facts it seems MMA has indeed transitioned into martial art.


----------



## jobo (Oct 7, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Learning to walk again through karate | Gisoku Budo - musings of an amputee martial artist
> 
> Losing a leg is no bar to martial arts expert Damon
> 
> ...


but he is not one legged is he, he is one footed, he still has MOST of his right leg,


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> my friend with a fake leg, falls over if he stands on a crisp packet


My great uncle with a fake leg doesn't fall down if he loses the leg while running.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but if we were saying self defence. Locks may not be optimally geared towards success. Low percentage and you need some pretty specific curcumstances for them to be the best response.
> 
> Now this goes to the origional premis of what is a martial art. If it is not geared towards self defence it is not one aparently.


I guess it depends how you look at them. Some locks (arm locks behind the body) are pretty reliable once the hand passes the hip. If the hand isn't there, there's no reason to try for them unless you need to get to a restraining position (LEO would be a good example), then you can use good technique to force the arm back there. Standing arm bars are, IMO, opportunistic. If you know the basic principle, they can happen in a lot of situations, but they aren't generally something you go chasing. Wrist locks, IMO, are entirely opportunistic except for restraint situations. I wouldn't teach them in a 1-year course, except so people could protect against them (they're easy to counter if you feel them coming), but in a longer term approach (which MA generally take), they are worth the time. Finger locks are really easy to execute when a finger comes handy, so they are definitely worth the time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> but he is not one legged is he, he is one footed, he still has MOST of his right leg,


The higher the amputation, the more limiting it can be.


----------



## DaveB (Oct 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> but why? in any sort of combat, I'm never going to pass up a chance to smash someone's knee in order to, to spend 3seconds getting them in a wrist lock that's if i can even pull the lock off, put them down, fast and then deal with anything else that arises, giving up a high % move for a low % move, that still leaves me vulrable to a,second attacker is folly



But locking in karate is really to make sure your strike lands. If the opponent isn't controlled in some way then your just rolling dice when you throw.


----------



## jobo (Oct 7, 2017)

DaveB said:


> But locking in karate is really to make sure your strike lands. If the opponent isn't controlled in some way then your just rolling dice when you throw.


if you can put a lock on, you already got. Hold of the arm,, how much more control do you need.

it may be rolling dice, but they are loads  dice


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> but he is not one legged is he, he is one footed, he still has MOST of his right leg,


----------



## jobo (Oct 7, 2017)

Tez3 said:


>


what %of his right leg has he lost, the cut is clearly below the knee, so he,still has most of his leg and isn't as you claim one legged


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> what %of his right leg has he lost, the cut is clearly below the knee, so he,still has most of his leg and isn't as you claim one legged



Oh well that's alright then isn't it.  hardly worth calling him disabled at all is it. Gosh he has nothing to complain about at all. You know, you really are a banker.


----------



## jobo (Oct 7, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Oh well that's alright then isn't it.  hardly worth calling him disabled at all is it. Gosh he has nothing to complain about at all. You know, you really are a banker.


you said he had only one leg, and that's clearly wrong, I've no idea what the other emotional tosh is about,


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 8, 2017)

jobo said:


> you said he had only one leg, and that's clearly wrong, I've no idea what the other emotional tosh is about,



Emotional? After struggling to read your posts because of the spelling and grammatical errors as well as the odd rambling (we assume you are dyslexic so no one has said anything, of course you could be pished and writing on a phone) I wonder if being unable to understand sarcasm holds you back much? Do you often have problems with discerning what people are saying? Are you on the autistic spectrum? If you are we can treat your posts with more understanding and just thinking you post deliberately nasty stuff.

Seriously, if you can't help it we can be more understanding.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 8, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Emotional? After struggling to read your posts because of the spelling and grammatical errors as well as the odd rambling (we assume you are dyslexic so no one has said anything, of course you could be pished and writing on a phone) I wonder if being unable to understand sarcasm holds you back much? Do you often have problems with discerning what people are saying? Are you on the autistic spectrum? If you are we can treat your posts with more understanding and just thinking you post deliberately nasty stuff.
> 
> Seriously, if you can't help it we can be more understanding.


Is that the royal we or do you have a mouse in your pocket? I have no problem understanding him, and you do have pretty thin skin...


----------



## Steve (Oct 8, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Is that the royal we or do you have a mouse in your pocket? I have no problem understanding him, and you do have pretty thin skin...


It gives the impression she gossips a bit via PM.


----------



## Steve (Oct 8, 2017)

Is pankration a style?  What about vale tudo or shoot boxing?


----------



## drop bear (Oct 8, 2017)

DaveB said:


> But locking in karate is really to make sure your strike lands. If the opponent isn't controlled in some way then your just rolling dice when you throw.



Not really.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 9, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Is that the royal we or do you have a mouse in your pocket? I have no problem understanding him, and you do have pretty thin skin...



No, I have a great line in sarcasm which obviously is hard for some to understand. You should also understand that if I post that the sky is blue jobo will argue and say it's pink, he's that sort of guy. 
As for the 'we' a lot of us talk outside the site. 

This is just for you, so you don't get all emotional about my posts.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2017)

Steve said:


> It gives the impression she gossips a bit via PM.



Well you do need to get your tactics together for these non sparring style conversions.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 9, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Well you do need to get your tactics together for these non sparring style conversions.



What are we converting to? I'm very fond of my religion and I don't want to change gender so what conversions are these?


----------



## drop bear (Oct 9, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> What are we converting to? I'm very fond of my religion and I don't want to change gender so what conversions are these?



Oh. Spelling mistake. I get it.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 9, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Oh. Spelling mistake. I get it.



Not a spelling mistake but a Freudian slip.


----------



## jobo (Oct 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> No, I have a great line in sarcasm which obviously is hard for some to understand. You should also understand that if I post that the sky is blue jobo will argue and say it's pink, he's that sort of guy.
> As for the 'we' a lot of us talk outside the site.
> 
> This is just for you, so you don't get all emotional about my posts.
> ...


no id say the sky isn't blue, its an optical illusion caused by the atmosphere absorbing the red end of the,spectrum, id further point out that the " sky" is its self an imaginary concept, so not only is the,sky not blue, there is no " sky"

for,someone who seems to pride herself on her sarcastic sense of humour, you seem really poor at picking up on other people sarcastic sense of humour?


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> no id say the sky isn't blue, its an optical illusion caused by the atmosphere absorbing the red end of the,spectrum, id further point out that the " sky" is its self an imaginary concept, so not only is the,sky not blue, there is no " sky"
> 
> for,someone who seems to pride herself on her sarcastic sense of humour, you seem really poor at picking up on other people sarcastic sense of humour?



Oh dear, you don't seem to realise I actually don't take any notice of what certain people say. Why would I? By the way I don't have a 'sarcastic sense of humour' I have a black sense of humour, sarcasm is something I use on numpties and bankers.


----------



## jobo (Oct 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Oh dear, you don't seem to realise I actually don't take any notice of what certain people say. Why would I? By the way I don't have a 'sarcastic sense of humour' I have a black sense of humour, sarcasm is something I use on numpties and bankers.


I'm not at all sure you have a,sense of humour at all, ? Certainly not when its you being,skitted,


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> I'm not at all sure you have a,sense of humour at all, ? Certainly not when its you being,skitted,



I'm sure we'll find out if anyone ever 'skitts' me.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I'm sure we'll find out if anyone ever 'skitts' me.


I think maybe a good skitting is what you need to lighten up 

Life is too short to be mad at the world.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 11, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I think maybe a good skitting is what you need to lighten up
> 
> Life is too short to be mad at the world.



My dear, if you go through life constantly misinterpreting what people say then it's a difficult one for you, I can assure you that I'm the least mad at the world person you can imagine, I don't write angrily, I'm not upset with the world nor do I care what people write on the internet. You are being led astray by your misconceptions and if you are trying to use an innuendo in the above post then I can assure you I'm well served in the skitting department ( whatever you think that word means) Urban Dictionary: skitting

Just a word of advice, when all you have is the words on the screen, no tone of voice or body language to guide you it's very easy to misunderstand what is being said, you are also being influenced by what another poster is saying, one who is deliberately trolling for an argument so your perception is skewed, perhaps before jumping in you should take time to think about what has actually been written rather than what you think has. I've been here 11 years longer than you, trust me, I know what I'm talking about, I've seen plenty of people come and go as well as stay. Aggressive and pugnacious posters rarely stay long, thoughtful ones do and are invaluable. 
However I'm sure you will feel free to ignore my advice and will carry on trying to bite posters here many of whom actually can get far madder than I ever do. Now run along and have a nice day.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 11, 2017)

If you say so


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 11, 2017)

Martial D said:


> If you say so



There you see, it's not so hard to agree with me and be right for a change. Actually I think you get off lightly from me, you don't have a lot of fans here at the moment due to some things you post.  If we are all disagreeing with you, perhaps you could wonder why.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 11, 2017)

See, there you go again.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 11, 2017)

Martial D said:


> See, there you go again.



Aw, have I upset you again babe?


----------



## Martial D (Oct 11, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Aw, have I upset you again babe?



No. You've never upset me, and I'm certainly not your babe or any other pet name you can passive aggressively think up.

I just think it's funny that you try to make everything personal. It conveys a certain image that you seem to be oblivious to.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 11, 2017)

Martial D said:


> No. You've never upset me, and I'm certainly not your babe or any other pet name you can passive aggressively think up.
> 
> I just think it's funny that you try to make everything personal. It conveys a certain image that you seem to be oblivious to.



You are very amusing. I love your use of 'passive aggressive', quite a buzzword these days  I love how you can't resist posting back with digs at me, I'm sooo flattered. 

Keep posting, sweetie, I love your style.


----------



## Martial D (Oct 11, 2017)

Not digs, just observations. Take them to heart, or don't.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 11, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Not digs, just observations. Take them to heart, or don't.



You_ are_ funny! I think you are trying to get the last word here or bump up your post count


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 11, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> You_ are_ funny! I think you are trying to get the last word here or bump up your post count


Bumping post counts is my job.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 11, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Bumping post counts is my job.



We don't seem to have 'poster of the month' anymore. I miss the games section we used to have as well, I used to love bopping the rabbits on the head. Ah the good old days.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 11, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> You_ are_ funny! I think you are trying to get the last word here or bump up your post count


LOL...sounds like my dear wife and I.
Me..."you've got to have the last word"
My dear wife..."no I don't."
Me..."made my point, thank you."
My dear wife..."that wasn't the last word."
Me...Hahahahaha!!


----------



## Danny T (Oct 11, 2017)

I thinks some peoples here under appreciate a sharp wit...unless it is only theirs.


----------



## Steve (Oct 11, 2017)

Danny T said:


> I thinks some peoples here under appreciate a sharp wit...unless it is only theirs.


I love it, when it’s funny.


----------

