Are competitive Sport Martial Artists superior?

I always find it odd when people attempt to separate martial arts from fighting when the very thing we’re talking about teaches people how to break limbs, choke people, or kick folks in the face.
I would like to interject here, I don’t see it so much as a separation. It’s that there are other things on the list besides fighting. You will get old one day, your fighting prowess will wane, your body will change, and so will your viewpoints. With that in mind, what will you have gained if fighting is the only reason you trained?
 
there is Tomiki Aikido which is in my opinion not a bad thing.



look at the very short, sharp sabaki.

Ok. But let's also discuss this in terms of understanding. There is no way you will understand the nuance of technique by drilling alone. You don't understand how to flow properly or get proper timing or even how to cope with loss or failure, how to deal with things like ego. Even how to make a technique that is someone else's, a technique that is yours. You may not even understand that these elements are vital to create a depth of understanding as to what you are doing.

Almost whatever they are trying to accomplish a good competitive guy will understand it better.

You have to experiment with the process to understand it better than the guy who taught it to you.

So we look at ippon seonagi.

And this does not show a great understanding of the move or the concept.

Here we see a completely different animal.
 
Any devotion to a physical discipline can bleed into other aspects of your life. Professional Basketball players are highly disciplined, incredible athletes, and have to conduct themselves in a certain manner in order to be better members of a team. Heck, Phil Jackson even incorporated Zen meditation and philosophy into his basketball coaching.

However, it still all revolved around putting a ball through a hoop.

I have no doubt that a 60 year old woman starting Aikido isn't looking to run the streets and snap the wrists of thugs and criminals, or walk into a ring and take down a MMA fighter. However, we would be fooling ourselves to believe that Aikido teaching her how to snap someone's wrist isn't a major reason why she's on that mat.



I do, because there's inherent hypocrisy involved. Take Aikido for example; I've seen people claim on one hand that it isn't about fighting ability or violence. However at the same time they like to wax nostalgic about their founders supposed fighting prowess. I also remember several posters telling me that Aikido schools don't advertise themselves as self defense schools. I then proceeded to post multiple links to Aikido schools doing exactly that.

Obviously Aikido isn't the only culprit in this, it's rampant throughout nearly all martial arts, including BJJ. Only cults and religion breed that level of illogic and cognitive dissonance. I would say though that BJJ as a whole doesn't hide what it actually is with unnecessary layers of fluff and silliness.

For now......
That statement sounds dismissive and rather elitist, so I like it for that. I think there could still be something out there that you might not know or have experienced. Try to stay open to ideas and processes you are unfamiliar with or you might miss something useful that could improve your fighting ability that has no obvious connection to fighting.
 
You will get old one day, your fighting prowess will wane, your body will change, and so will your viewpoints. With that in mind, what will you have gained if fighting is the only reason you trained?
The simple answer is, "Fighting is fun." To be able to dodge a punch, or block a kick can make you very excited. When you take someone down, you feel that you have confidence in yourself.

When you get old, you will spend the rest of your life trying to enhance/complete your fighting principle/strategy. There are a lot of work in this area that can be done.

When you get old, you will have 2 options.

1. Give up MA and only care about health.
2. Try to maintain your MA ability until the day that you die.

People use method 1 may train like this:


People use method 2 may train like this:

 
Last edited:
I would like to interject here, I don’t see it so much as a separation. It’s that there are other things on the list besides fighting. You will get old one day, your fighting prowess will wane, your body will change, and so will your viewpoints. With that in mind, what will you have gained if fighting is the only reason you trained?
As with any aging athlete, you slow down. This is really an odd point that is brought pretty often. Getting too old to participate fully in the activity doesn't negate the development of skill.

Ultimately, consider how utterly sad it would be to do something for years and have very little functional ability to show for your efforts... getting up toward your 10,000 hours you think is learning how to physically defend yourself, only to realize that it has been 10,000 hours learning a version of professional wrestling.

As your physical abilities begin to wane and you are at a point where you should by all rights be able to share the benefits of your experience... you realize that you aren't very good at what you think you've been learning all these years. I guess, you might say, "Oh man. I'm 60 and I have never been in a fight... but at least I can pretend to break someone's wrist and play act at curb stomping them."
 
I always find it odd when people attempt to separate martial arts from fighting when the very thing we’re talking about teaches people how to break limbs, choke people, or kick folks in the face.
Agree with you 100% there. My favor question is, "What's your finish move?"

I won't be interested in any training that won't lead me toward my finish move.
 
That statement sounds dismissive and rather elitist, so I like it for that. I think there could still be something out there that you might not know or have experienced. Try to stay open to ideas and processes you are unfamiliar with or you might miss something useful that could improve your fighting ability that has no obvious connection to fighting.

Having an unbiased view of new techniques doesn't mean you have to give credence to all techniques.

If you applied just basic Critical thinking to martial arts then you are open to being swayed by evidence.

It is not a case where you just accept any old thing.
 
As with any aging athlete, you slow down. This is really an odd point that is brought pretty often. Getting too old to participate fully in the activity doesn't negate the development of skill.

Ultimately, consider how utterly sad it would be to do something for years and have very little functional ability to show for your efforts... getting up toward your 10,000 hours you think is learning how to physically defend yourself, only to realize that it has been 10,000 hours learning a version of professional wrestling.

As your physical abilities begin to wane and you are at a point where you should by all rights be able to share the benefits of your experience... you realize that you aren't very good at what you think you've been learning all these years. I guess, you might say, "Oh man. I'm 60 and I have never been in a fight... but at least I can pretend to break someone's wrist and play act at curb stomping them."
You miss my point. I’m past your benchmark of10,000 hrs by quite a stretch. I have fought plenty. I am still large and strong and fast. I have hurt people more times than I care to remember. I practice both a hard and a soft style of cma. I trained in jiujitsu for several years before starting cma. I am getting older (50’s) and am finding that my interest in improving my skills has less to do with hurting people and more to do with using that same ability and energy to help people. It is my experience that most people who would be willing to attack me don’t have much fighting skill to speak of. They are like children mostly. Is it moral to beat up children just because I can? Is that really the end goal? Thats such a waste and a pity. Just get a gun and call it good, that is also a martial art, they teach it to thousands every year in basic training in eight weeks.
 
Having an unbiased view of new techniques doesn't mean you have to give credence to all techniques.

If you applied just basic Critical thinking to martial arts then you are open to being swayed by evidence.

It is not a case where you just accept any old thing.
A very full cup you have there sir. You must have infallible skill at distilling the very best… I wonder what it would take to convince you that it’s a wide world out there? Not everyone with skill is willing to demonstrate it to just any old person. This whole thread really just saddens me a bit.
 
The simple answer is, "Fighting is fun." To be able to dodge a punch, or block a kick can make you very excited. When you take someone down, you feel that you have confidence in yourself.

When you get old, you will spend the rest of your life trying to enhance/complete your fighting principle/strategy. There are a lot of work in this area that can be done.

When you get old, you will have 2 options.

1. Give up MA and only care about health.
2. Try to maintain your MA ability until the day that you die.

People use method 1 may train like this:


People use method 2 may train like this:

I love it, I do it, I plan to continue.
 
Careful here, do you have ptsd? If you do then please elaborate, if you don’t, then I will tell you now that You are out of your wheelhouse.
no i don´t but i have a good friend who does. Actually PTSD is not only a problem in the military but in other walks of life.
It´s only in recent years they have recognized this.
shell shock was around in WW1 but it was called lack of moral fiber.
I think the most absurd thing was from an ex French Foreign legionnaire who i spoke to. well actually two and both had contradicting stories.
One was a Belgian guy who served in a conflict can´t remember now and was wounded he said, no Legionnaire ever suffered from PTSD. He was a serious drunk but did serve in the Legion. won´t go into details.
The other was a German guy who joined after WW2 and served in Russia with my wifes Grandfather. He was in Indochina and told me we were surrounded and i was not prepared to die for France(was ( was freed to go to the then communist East Germany).
just throwing this in there. I have also met stalingrad vets who told me their story. I saw that they were real men but still suffered.
 
A very full cup you have there sir. You must have infallible skill at distilling the very best… I wonder what it would take to convince you that it’s a wide world out there? Not everyone with skill is willing to demonstrate it to just any old person. This whole thread really just saddens me a bit.

The issue is this line of reasoning is a marketing scam. I know nothing really of running so how could I possibly tell if Usain Bolt knows more about running than say, Stephen Segal?

I mean I could look at both runners achiements or see how fast they run. But that would take at least five minutes and the ability to write words in to a search engine.

I am far better off giving the same credibility to both those guys just in case there is a secret that is not discernible by basically all methods of research in to the topic.

And this is on the presumption that runners like Stephen Segal are actually using better systems than ursain bolt to make sure their methods are only used by a select few who have proven themselves worthy enough.

And the presumption that ursain bolt literally won't give this information away.

I mean come on. How far do people expect me to suspend disbelief?

 
Last edited:
A very full cup you have there sir. You must have infallible skill at distilling the very best… I wonder what it would take to convince you that it’s a wide world out there? Not everyone with skill is willing to demonstrate it to just any old person. This whole thread really just saddens me a bit.
You come over like a bit of a guy who is full of himself and probably has very little to bring to the table.
Tell us all your skills...we are all ears
 
Having an unbiased view of new techniques doesn't mean you have to give credence to all techniques.

If you applied just basic Critical thinking to martial arts then you are open to being swayed by evidence.

It is not a case where you just accept any old thing
You come over like a bit of a guy who is full of himself and probably has very little to bring to the table.
Tell us all your skills...we are all ears
Fair enough, Its obvious you have all the info here. If you don’t like my input that’s ok. It’s just my opinion. I don’t think I am anyone special. I am a long time martial arts enthusiast, I have some experiences that inform my opinion. I really am not here to prove myself or impress anyone. I thought this was a forum to discuss and debate and maybe, just maybe get some interesting or lucid info.
 
That statement sounds dismissive and rather elitist, so I like it for that. I think there could still be something out there that you might not know or have experienced. Try to stay open to ideas and processes you are unfamiliar with or you might miss something useful that could improve your fighting ability that has no obvious connection to fighting.

Except we're talking about a topic I know a great deal about, since I've been doing martial arts for the majority of my life.

In addition, the POINT is that everything you do in a martial art should improve your fighting ability.
 
Back
Top