Differences Between the Keysi Fighting Method and Defence Lab

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

But people have said OPs concept won't work and isn't legitimate.

Where it is as legitimate as anything else out there.

With the exception of possibly Chris, who's reply I only skimmed, people are not saying it won't work and isn't legitimate. And if no one is saying that the other styles in question are legitimate, what difference does that make?

Unless your claim is that no style ever works, in which case I have to wonder why you do mma.

 

[drop bear]

With the exception of possibly Chris, who's reply I only skimmed, people are not saying it won't work and isn't legitimate. And if no one is saying that the other styles in question are legitimate, what difference does that make?

Unless your claim is that no style ever works, in which case I have to wonder why you do mma.

"What people have said is that the idea of combining 'the best parts' of two systems, when you don't actually know anything about either system is a stupid idea."

Dirty Dog.

Saying all styles work and no styles work is technically saying the same thing. Because you don't get an advantage from training a style. They all work. So why train at all? (Which by that logic should still work.)

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

"What people have said is that the idea of combining 'the best parts' of two systems, when you don't actually know anything about either system is a stupid idea."

Dirty Dog.

Saying all styles work and no styles work is technically saying the same thing. Because you don't get an advantage from training a style. They all work. So why train at all? (Which by that logic should still work.)

Ah, I see what you're doing. You're being purposefully obtuse to point out the issue of "all styles work"/"no styles work". Your pet project. Which I haven't heard anyone genuinely suggest either of those in a couple years. People have either acknowledged that certain styles are in fact bad or good, changing the debate to how to determine that, or they no longer come to this site. While you seem to be stuck in that past argument because yes, you were right.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Why is that any more stupid than any other idea?

Are you seriously suggesting that you don't understand why trying to combine systems you know nothing about is stupid?

 

[Martial D]

What can be done if there is enough evidence of Keysi efficacy. But there is not. So mr. DiyorDie89 wants to create new SD style using untested techniques, tactics and strategies only because of their cool looking in demos and Batman movie.
edit: maybe it is my personal bias but I really do not like people who absolutely want to create new SD style without any necessity (except need to self-esteem). Especially if they do not have enough knowledge and experience. I have met a few masters-of-they-own-styles and they all were 100% bullshido and parody of martial artists.

What is the difference between a master of an established style that doesn't work in real life and a master of a self created style that doesn't work in real life? Why is one a parody while the other is not?

 

[Dirty Dog]

"What people have said is that the idea of combining 'the best parts' of two systems, when you don't actually know anything about either system is a stupid idea."

Dirty Dog.

Saying all styles work and no styles work is technically saying the same thing. Because you don't get an advantage from training a style. They all work. So why train at all? (Which by that logic should still work.)

I don't see how it's remotely possible for a rational person to read what I wrote and find any statement or even inference about the effectiveness of any system.

 

[drop bear]

Ah, I see what you're doing. You're being purposefully obtuse to point out the issue of "all styles work"/"no styles work". Your pet project. Which I haven't heard anyone genuinely suggest either of those in a couple years. People have either acknowledged that certain styles are in fact bad or good, changing the debate to how to determine that, or they no longer come to this site. While you seem to be stuck in that past argument because yes, you were right.

Oh. I am being obtuse?

If it is any consolidation I was going to do a don't dog pile the new guy line. Which is also a pet project of mine.

But nobody ever does that either.

So I guess I am the silly Billy.

 

[drop bear]

I don't see how it's remotely possible for a rational person to read what I wrote and find any statement or even inference about the effectiveness of any system.

We don't discuss rationally. We discuss emotionally.

Like this post. Which argues on the basis of an ad hominem.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Oh. I am being obtuse?

If it is any consolidation I was going to do a don't dog pile the new guy line. Which is also a pet project of mine.

But nobody ever does that either.

So I guess I am the silly Billy.

Nah the dog pile gets done. That's fine. Just your other argument is one that was settled years ago on here, with basically everyone including you in agreement.

 

[drop bear]

Are you seriously suggesting that you don't understand why trying to combine systems you know nothing about is stupid?

No. I don't see why it is any more stupid than anything else.

For me it is simple. It will either work and OP would provide evidence of it working. Or it won't and OP will dodge the issue with paragraphs as to why it should work.

But I am consistent with this stance.

 

[drop bear]

Nah the dog pile gets done. That's fine. Just your other argument is one that was settled years ago on here, with basically everyone including you in agreement.

It isn't a popular opinion game. I think that is the major contention between our reasoning methods.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

It isn't a popular opinion game. I think that is the major contention between our reasoning methods.

It's not a popular opinion issue. It's that you're continuing an argument with no one on the other side of it, acting like everyone is on the other side.

 

[Tez3]

No. I don't see why it is any more stupid than anything else.

For me it is simple. It will either work and OP would provide evidence of it working. Or it won't and OP will dodge the issue with paragraphs as to why it should work.

But I am consistent with this stance.

You haven't explained yet why the posters here are supposed to be the ones putting the work in by telling him what works and what doesnt so he can make up his new style.
Why shouldn't he be the one who trains these styles and does the sifting of techniques?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

the idea of combining 'the best parts' of two systems,

When the OP started this thread, some people care about whether he is qualified to combine different MA systems or not. I only care about whether these 2 systems have anything unique that other MA systems don't have and worthwhile to train.

So what's the "best parts" of these 2 systems?

 

[Flying Crane]

When the OP started this thread, some people care about whether he is qualified to combine different MA systems or not. I only care about whether these 2 systems have anything unique that other MA systems don't have and worthwhile to train.

So what's the "best parts" of these 2 systems?

And the only way to answer that question is to spend some good time training in them. Which the OP has not done.

which I just continue to find very strange. He picked these two systems, while having zero knowledge or experience with them. Why would he even think that he wants to combine these particular systems? If one is inclined to create their own method, they usually base it on things with which they already have some experience.

Weird.

 

[jks9199]

Folks,
I've worked like 30 hours since 7 am Wednesday. Not the time to be pushing me to put the official hat on because you can't keep it friendly, because my reactions might be a little swift and a lot harsh...

So keep friendly, okay?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

And the only way to answer that question is to spend some good time training in them. Which the OP has not done.

The problem is even one has trained both systems, the integration still may not be possible.

I have trained both long fist and WC for so many years. I still don't know how to integrate both systems together. When I punch, should I use the long fist wide bow-arrow stance, or should I use the WC narrow goat gripping stance? Should I punch like a long fist guy on M, W, and F, and punch like a WC guy on Tu, Th, and Sat?

 

[Flying Crane]

The problem is even one has trained both systems, the integration still may not be possible.

I have trained both long fist and WC for so many years. I still don't know how to integrate both systems together. When I punch, should I use the long fist wide bow-arrow stance, or should I use the WC narrow goat gripping stance? Should I punch like a long fist guy on M, W, and F, and punch like a WC guy on Tu, Th, and Sat?

Absolutely true.

 

[drop bear]

You haven't explained yet why the posters here are supposed to be the ones putting the work in by telling him what works and what doesnt so he can make up his new style.
Why shouldn't he be the one who trains these styles and does the sifting of techniques?

I haven't had an issue with people either doing that or not.

 

[drop bear]

It's not a popular opinion issue. It's that you're continuing an argument with no one on the other side of it, acting like everyone is on the other side.

So this is everyone agreeing?