Most effective striking arts in your opinions

[skribs]

I absolutely disagree with this assessment.

If one person trains 4 punches, and another person trains 8 punches, 5 open-hand strikes, half a dozen kicks, and a bunch of throws, the person training 4 punches is going to be better with them. It's simple time management.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

If one person trains 4 punches, and another person trains 8 punches, 5 open-hand strikes, half a dozen kicks, and a bunch of throws, the person training 4 punches is going to be better with them. It's simple time management.

Not necessarily. If you only train 4 punches, and I train all that other stuff, my punches, against other punches, would be better. But I would have no idea how to handle all that other stuff. For instance, I wouldn't know how to punch to prevent a takedown, or the timing/footwork to make my punch effective against a roundhouse kick.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Not necessarily. If you only train 4 punches, and I train all that other stuff, my punches, against other punches, would be better. But I would have no idea how to handle all that other stuff. For instance, I wouldn't know how to punch to prevent a takedown, or the timing/footwork to make my punch effective against a roundhouse kick.

@skribs What do you disagree about here? Again, boxing is great at teaching you to punch and dealing with punching...if that's all your opponent does. It doesn't teach you how to punch a grappler or kicker though. To me that's pretty clear cut, unless I'm missing something?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Stupid thread ....

- What's the best MA style?
- Is MT better than boxing?
- Is wrestling better than Judo?
- Is blue pretty than green?
- Can your teacher beat up my teacher?
- ...

 

[Hanzou]

@skribs What do you disagree about here? Again, boxing is great at teaching you to punch and dealing with punching...if that's all your opponent does. It doesn't teach you how to punch a grappler or kicker though. To me that's pretty clear cut, unless I'm missing something?

Are there many striking systems that teach you how to deal with a grappler? Only one I've seen that does a decent job is MMA, but that's because it incorporates grappling.

 

[JR 137]

Are there many striking systems that teach you how to deal with a grappler? Only one I've seen that does a decent job is MMA, but that's because it incorporates grappling.

You mean you haven’t see the anti-grappling videos

 

[Flying Crane]

If one person trains 4 punches, and another person trains 8 punches, 5 open-hand strikes, half a dozen kicks, and a bunch of throws, the person training 4 punches is going to be better with them. It's simple time management.

No, it has to do with methodology. I’m simply not convinced that boxers train punches in the best way possible, with the best biomechanics.

What they do is perhaps the best for the context of a boxing match, which includes wearing bulky protective gloves, and allows for a competitive career within a fairly short period of training and preparation. Coupled with athleticism, and that can be very effective indeed, especially within their particular context. Of course it can also translate very effectively outside the ring as well. I am certainly NOT saying that boxers are unskilled or are not effective.

But i do not believe that they utilize the best punching practices in an absolute way.

 

[skribs]

@skribs What do you disagree about here? Again, boxing is great at teaching you to punch and dealing with punching...if that's all your opponent does. It doesn't teach you how to punch a grappler or kicker though. To me that's pretty clear cut, unless I'm missing something?

Because you're talking about the quantity of situations in which you would use punches, and not the quality of the punches themselves.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Because you're talking about the quantity of situations in which you would use punches, and not the quality of the punches themselves.

If I cant use a punch to defend myself in multiple situations, which is the primary purpose (imo) of punching, that is saying something about the quality of the punching training.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Are there many striking systems that teach you how to deal with a grappler? Only one I've seen that does a decent job is MMA, but that's because it incorporates grappling.

You already nailed the biggest. I would also include combat sambo, striking is less of a priority, but it specifically teaches striking to deal with grappling. I would bet theres some CMA out there that teaches how to handle shuai jiao, although I dont know that for certain. Outside of that most that I've seen dont. Which, to me, means there system is lacking. Only way for most people to get a full striking system is to go to a grappling school regularly to spar against them (different then cross training at the school)

 

[skribs]

If I cant use a punch to defend myself in multiple situations, which is the primary purpose (imo) of punching, that is saying something about the quality of the punching training.

Someone who has trained how to properly control distance with their punches will have a bigger advantage in these scenarios than you think. The situations in which their training wouldn't be effective are far less than you'd think.

The biggest weakness for a boxer would be someone who grabs both of their hands or arms, or else someone who gets them on the ground.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Someone who has trained how to properly control distance with their punches will have a bigger advantage in these scenarios than you think. The situations in which their training wouldn't be effective are far less than you'd think.

The biggest weakness for a boxer would be someone who grabs both of their hands or arms, or else someone who gets them on the ground.

I'm going by personal experience with this. If as a striker you face off someone who knows how to handle a striker, and you don't have experience against a grappler, you're pretty much screwed. It doesn't take much to learn to adapt, but that's not something you'll learn in boxing, because they don't have the need to teach you it.

 

[Denoaikido]

jr 137 ^^^^^Did you read the title or read the last sentence.My question is what more stand uppish based striking arts are there really beside boxing and karate and tkd none them really interest me? This was the title of the thread Most effective striking arts in your opinions..... This is a board full of different arts i thought be great place to hear some ideas and exchange thoughts

 

[skribs]

I'm going by personal experience with this. If as a striker you face off someone who knows how to handle a striker, and you don't have experience against a grappler, you're pretty much screwed. It doesn't take much to learn to adapt, but that's not something you'll learn in boxing, because they don't have the need to teach you it.

I'm not saying that it's the best quality art. I'm saying in terms of techniques, the narrow focus increases your competency in those techniques.

I agree with you that it won't be the best for every situation. But this is why there is no "best" striking art, and why any of the good striking arts are going to work, and all of the striking arts are going to have holes in them. Some will be useful in more situations, some will hone a more specific set of skills better.

 

[skribs]

^^^^^Did you read the title or read the last sentence.My question is what more stand uppish based striking arts are there really beside boxing and karate and tkd none them really interest me? This was the title of the thread Most effective striking arts in your opinions..... This is a board full of different arts i thought be great place to hear some ideas and exchange thoughts

To be honest, your post was all over the place, so I think most people are responding to the title.

 

[Flying Crane]

I'm not saying that it's the best quality art. I'm saying in terms of techniques, the narrow focus increases your competency in those techniques.

I agree with you that it won't be the best for every situation. But this is why there is no "best" striking art, and why any of the good striking arts are going to work, and all of the striking arts are going to have holes in them. Some will be useful in more situations, some will hone a more specific set of skills better.

It increases your competency with those techniques, if that is what you spend all of your time training.

However, you would be training according to the methodology and biomechanics that you learned from boxing.

I am not convinced that boxing objectively uses the best methods and best biomechanics.

A boxer who trains hard and is athletic and even gifted may perform better than others. But his skill with what he does is not an indicator that the methodology is the “best”.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I'm not saying that it's the best quality art. I'm saying in terms of techniques, the narrow focus increases your competency in those techniques.

I agree with you that it won't be the best for every situation. But this is why there is no "best" striking art, and why any of the good striking arts are going to work, and all of the striking arts are going to have holes in them. Some will be useful in more situations, some will hone a more specific set of skills better.

"If one person trains 4 punches, and another person trains 8 punches, 5 open-hand strikes, half a dozen kicks, and a bunch of throws, the person training 4 punches is going to be better with them. It's simple time management." That was the original thing that I quoted. And again, in theory that's true. But if you're only training those 4 punches against other people using the exact same 4 punches, you're not going to be better with them because you're not going to know how to use them against anything else.

 

[Denoaikido]

I just wanted to know the most effective striking art in a martial arts forum and i was explaining what I have done and asking about what arts that I haven't done and or had no interest in doing is all

 

[skribs]

I just wanted to know the most effective striking art in a martial arts forum and i was explaining what I have done and asking about what arts that I haven't done and or had no interest in doing is all

Do you want to know the most effective striking art? That's the title of your thread and what we assume the question is. You're not going to get an answer to that. There's pros and cons to every art, and whatever striking art you take is going to have reasons to take it over everything else. What's more important is your master.

Do you want a list of striking arts that you're not aware of? In that case, you should have made that the title of your thread. Alternatively, you could go to Google or Wikipedia and look up "List of Striking Martial Arts".

At this point, it becomes important to ask: why is it that Taekwondo, Karate, and Boxing have no interest to you? What is it about them you don't like? I can see things about each one of them that's not to like, but it's hard for me to look at all 3 and think "I can understand why someone who wants to learn striking hates all 3 of these". If you don't like forms, there's boxing. If you want something well-rounded and focused on self defense there's karate. If you want something more stylized and to focus on kicks to a greater degree than anything but Capoeira, there's Taekwondo. I don't really know what it is that you want out of a striking art that you can't get out of one of these three.

 

[CB Jones]

I just wanted to know the most effective striking art in a martial arts forum and i was explaining what I have done and asking about what arts that I haven't done and or had no interest in doing is all

Well in a martial arts forum it would have to be verbal judo.