Why not call it performance martial arts, with the titles of World Performance Martial Arts Grandchampion. There wouldn't be much issue then. They are the ones competing for the WORLD/NATIONAL what have you Weapons Grandchampionship. It's the donut calling itself a steak, not the other way around. I just don't understand your point, explain it to me more simply. PEACE
Extreme martial arts: Your thoughts?
- Thread starter Swordlady
- Start date
I enjoy watching them perform as well. However, I do not equate what they are doing as martial arts. Definately not combative martial arts. Having said that for entertainment purposes it is okay.
Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com
Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com
It's a forms competition, isn't it a given that it is performance?Jimi said:
They never claim Full contact titles or championship belts, just forms titles. Seems pretty acurate to me.
lll000000lll
Green Belt
tradrockrat said:This is a great point that bothers me too. As long as they're not selling it as the "real deal" why can't some people just sit back and enjoy it?
Now if they are trying to pass it off as something other than it is, then we have an issue, but even then I don't see it as bad as others do - nobody really believes the WWE is actual wrestling, do you really think people believe XMA is combat?
Have a little faith
i agree, i dont think XMA or EMA people would even consider using their abilities in a real self defense situation. people can sometimes become so uptight about their own martial art, and become very negative. i think if it makes you happy then do it. and if you are having fun would you want someone to come along and pass judgment on you??? let them roll around on the ground and walk on their hands.
So some one who wins a World Karate Weapons Grandchampionship Title and has no true understanding of the weapons function is considered a weapons master? Forms competition is a performance of weapons skills, knowledge and history, without that knowledge and understandiing it is a dance contest Andrew, not a weapons skills performance. Flipping a sword is not what a sword art is about. Military drill teams do demos in which they do the Queen Anne Salute, but they don't look at the drill team championship title as a way fool people into thinking the rifle flip is military combat and done on the battlefield. Why do you argue so much that what they do is a MA when it is Performance art like when my niece dances in competition? I do not hate XMA as a performance, it is flashy and entertaining, but it is far from what is taught as the function of any weapon I have seen. So the back flip and KIAI at the begining of an XMA weapons form is to show that they can use the weapons as many generations have trained to use it before them. I think not.
Who is trying to fool anyone? I've yet to see / hear a Weapons forms competitior claim they can fight with the weapon based on what they do...?
You are judging there martial art by your criteria, and, no surprise, it fails. Of course judging your martial art by there criteria would cause yours to fail too.
Yes, it is performance based, no one denies that. Except for some odd reason people that don't do it and want to attack it based on that...
You are judging there martial art by your criteria, and, no surprise, it fails. Of course judging your martial art by there criteria would cause yours to fail too.
Yes, it is performance based, no one denies that. Except for some odd reason people that don't do it and want to attack it based on that...
I never claimed these guys should be able to fight with such weapons, that's your judgement on me. What I believe is for someone to participate in a forms competition demonsrtating a weapon, that person should be trained in the correct use of the weapon, not just what flippies they think is cool. It seems you want to make me out to be an XMA hater, lol, and the title of weapons grandchampion is what they covet or desire if you will, so they are pursuing a title that does not reflect their weapons knowledge and training. If an XMA would demo the true skills of swordsmanship or any other weapon first to show they truely know the weapon then show the flippie after as a show of dexterity, I would be impressed and not have issue with such a weapons grandchampion title. Weapon dexterity is not weapons knowledge. Do you see my point or are you just turning my points into "You XMA hater?
I do see yours, but I think you are missing mine. They do not claim or desire to have any functional weapons skills. It is purely performance, they know it, we know it, and anyone that pays an ounce of attention will figure it out. Why should they have to learn "real" weapons work if that is not their interest, or something they claim to have / teach?
The title does reflect what they do, as the title is meant for people doing what they do. They are champions in the sport of doing a performance with a weapon, that is what they claim, and that is what they are.
It is an artform, one that requires a great deal of athleticism and dedication, It is a martial art, and it is a performance. It is not a combat sport, or a self-defence system. It has champions, in "Forms" and "Forms with weapons".
Where is the dispute?
I think it is here:
And my take is that they are, as far as their goals with the weapon go, they are trained in the correct use of the weapon. Maybe not "Correct" for other purposes, such as application against a live opponent, or traditiona forms, but that's not what they are training for, so those methods would be incorrect given what they want to achieve.
The title does reflect what they do, as the title is meant for people doing what they do. They are champions in the sport of doing a performance with a weapon, that is what they claim, and that is what they are.
It is an artform, one that requires a great deal of athleticism and dedication, It is a martial art, and it is a performance. It is not a combat sport, or a self-defence system. It has champions, in "Forms" and "Forms with weapons".
Where is the dispute?
I think it is here:
And my take is that they are, as far as their goals with the weapon go, they are trained in the correct use of the weapon. Maybe not "Correct" for other purposes, such as application against a live opponent, or traditiona forms, but that's not what they are training for, so those methods would be incorrect given what they want to achieve.
Please better define the correct use of the weapon if it is not relative to the traditions of how the weapons are used in self defense. You seem to be talking in circles. On one hand you say they are performers and have no need to show the weapons applications to perform,then you say their art is martial when it is evident what they do shows no martial application, that's just the kind of talk I have issue with. You ask" Why should they have to learn real weapons work if that is not their interest, or something they claim to have/teach?", yet XMA practioners produce videos of Swordsmanship Skills and show nothing but baton twirling with a weapon in hand and compete to achieve the title weapons champion. How can you say the Title of Weapons Grandchampion reflects what they do, when what they perform only shows weapons work in the most superficial way. I do take issue with your statement that they are trained in the correct use of the weapon, if they are mere performers who do not need the real weapons work, why go to a martial arts assoc. to compete for a weapons title? Forms divisions are for the competition of emptyhand & weapons forms to show the historical use of the body and weapons to defend oneself, omitt the techniques & strategies that embody those traditions and replace it with although compitent gymnastics and dexterity, is not a martial form whatsoever. I say again, I do not take away from the fact that these PERFORMERS are talented and athletic, but what they do is not martial by your own admittance. Then you state why should they learn the real martial way of a weapon to compete and win in a martial arts competition. Do you see the circles you are running in. They have no need to be martial, it is not their intent, yet they compete form a martial arts title. You get it yet?
Kenpojujitsu3
Master Black Belt
Andrew Green said:
Agreed. People forget that "realism" in martial arts training is not everyone's goal. Everyone comes to and stays with martial arts for a different reason. And a forms competition does not in any way, shape or form show knowledge. I've seen TOOOOO many forms competitors who move as smooth as silk and show as much power as a cannon. Unfortunately those are just physical attributes. These same people couldn't tell me why they were doing what they were doing or what the movements meant, that's knowledge.
Correct is a subjective term. Somethings correctness depends on the rule set or intention. What's the "correct" method for using a carpenter's hammer?.....................depends......are you banging, pressing, clawing, or cutting something. Each different use has a different "correct" way of using the same hammer. Therefore what's the correct way of using their weapons? The way that satisfies the goals of thier competition. What's the correct way of using a rifle? depends is the target to be shot, butted, stabbed or restrained.....or is the rifle to be flipped and presented like in ceremonies and ROTC?
People may need to stop confusing and assuming that because they hold an ideal of what martial arts training is for everyone else holds the same ideal. Ed Parker created American Kenpo as a commercial venture and a self-defense system, Jigoro Kano created Judo to improve health and culture and add something to education, Ueshiba created Aikido as a means to cultivate individuals. Kano demanded sporting competition while Ueshiba frowned upon it. The arts have many different meanings, many different training ideals and many different purposes. The founders knew this, why is it so hard for others to get?
Food for thought......
Form follows function.
If your goal is to perform, your form will be based around that. If your goal is to fight, your form will be based around that.
For the function they are performing, they understand the "correct" way to use the weapon. For the function they are demonstrating, the videos DO show proper swordsmanship.
If your goal is to perform, your form will be based around that. If your goal is to fight, your form will be based around that.
For the function they are performing, they understand the "correct" way to use the weapon. For the function they are demonstrating, the videos DO show proper swordsmanship.
Whoever thought the blue power ranger could generate so much controversy?? j/k
I think for me it's hard to judge XMA one way or another because I've never taken class in any XMA dojo. I don't think a lot of things in their forms are incredibly practical, but seing someone's forms arent enough to judge the whole system. That's all i've seen. Heck, maybe they purposefully do their forms as such so no one will believe XMA has any combat effectiveness. That's what capoeiristas did in the beginings of their martial art, and continue to do today, and it's worked out pretty well for them.
But those forms have athleticism and fluid movement in them, and athleticism and fluid movement unquestionably aid one in combat. If I'm in a fight, I'm not going to counter a punch with a series of jumping jacks or pushups, but they help with fighting, hollistically. There are also many forms in shaolinquan that have no combat effectiveness.
I'm hesitant to judge XMA because of that. Is there anyone here who's been in one of their dojos? Maybe they could give me more insight. Might turnout they're badass. Might turn out they're America's answer to Chinese Opera. I think more research is necessary.
I think for me it's hard to judge XMA one way or another because I've never taken class in any XMA dojo. I don't think a lot of things in their forms are incredibly practical, but seing someone's forms arent enough to judge the whole system. That's all i've seen. Heck, maybe they purposefully do their forms as such so no one will believe XMA has any combat effectiveness. That's what capoeiristas did in the beginings of their martial art, and continue to do today, and it's worked out pretty well for them.
But those forms have athleticism and fluid movement in them, and athleticism and fluid movement unquestionably aid one in combat. If I'm in a fight, I'm not going to counter a punch with a series of jumping jacks or pushups, but they help with fighting, hollistically. There are also many forms in shaolinquan that have no combat effectiveness.
I'm hesitant to judge XMA because of that. Is there anyone here who's been in one of their dojos? Maybe they could give me more insight. Might turnout they're badass. Might turn out they're America's answer to Chinese Opera. I think more research is necessary.
It's not about effectiveness, it's about show. No hidden meanings, no public face / private face. It's just the show.
matt.m said:
yup, same category, and they are still "Wrestling"
(WWE came because WWF was being confused with something else. Legal issues
)I agree form follows function, but in an XMA Kama or Sword Form, the form should follow the function of the weapon showing a weapon as a weapon , not just a flashy platform to show off gymnastic skills and physique. I don't see how your statement FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION proves your point right. The goal in weapons competition is to perform showing the weapons techniques, ( HENCE MARTIAL ART) without such technique the form has no function other than a dance. You admitt they are not performing to show the martial application of the weapon, so why do they consider themselves Extreme MARTIAL ARTS. To say they are not claimimg Martial as their intent is a false statement, MARTIAL is in their arts name. Do you agrue this just for arguements sake, or do you realy believe that XMA is the Martial art without Martial in it? My opinion aside, to each his/her own.
MOST martial arts have nothing "Martial" about them, even of the most traditional or the most realistic ones. Most are civillian practices, not in any way connected to a Military now or ever...
The name, "Martial arts" when read as the meaning of both words individually is not a great wat to interpret it as a whole. Words change in meaning as there usage changes. "Martial arts" is used to describe theatrical fighting, as well as real fighting. I'm sorry you don't like it, but that's just the way it worked out.
The English language is full of terms that if you look at their meaning over time, they change. Take "Gay" as an example, within many peoples lifetimes the meaning has come to be quite different then what it was a very short time ago.
Yes, there is nothing Military about what they do, nor what I do, and probably not what you do. All are still "Martial Arts".
The name, "Martial arts" when read as the meaning of both words individually is not a great wat to interpret it as a whole. Words change in meaning as there usage changes. "Martial arts" is used to describe theatrical fighting, as well as real fighting. I'm sorry you don't like it, but that's just the way it worked out.
The English language is full of terms that if you look at their meaning over time, they change. Take "Gay" as an example, within many peoples lifetimes the meaning has come to be quite different then what it was a very short time ago.
Yes, there is nothing Military about what they do, nor what I do, and probably not what you do. All are still "Martial Arts".
