Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
And boxers have died in the ring too, MMA, Sanda, BJJ all have some pretty bad injuries too..
Different focus than the average person out there doing "martial arts" today
Observations
- Thread starter Bill Mattocks
- Start date
And boxers have died in the ring too, MMA, Sanda, BJJ all have some pretty bad injuries too..
Different focus than the average person out there doing "martial arts" today
lklawson
Grandmaster
So the focus of those ancient arts is pretty similar to the ones which you've referenced but still different from what Bill summarized or what you are specifying as what "the average person out there doing 'martial arts' today" is? That was kinda my point.
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
The op makes a lot of absolute statements that he may feel are true, I'm not going to list them one by one and say why I disagree, it would be a lot of work and most likely a waste of time. you cannot claim you are right and others wrong without measure able evidence. There is no evidence that training with kata provides any form of superior technique or sense of fulfillment for its practitioners. You cannot make statements about "real martial arts" or "true martial artists" this is like saying "real men do ...." It's a biased statement that implies anyone who doesn't ascribe to your way of thinking is wrong. I do agree with much of the op and I realize he's sharing his own thoughts, but just because he believes something is true doesn't make it so.
OP
OP
I entitled my post 'Observations' for that very reason. I claim no handle on objective truth. These are observations I have made during my journey.
Yes you are entitled to your observations, I'm entitled to disagree with some of them. When you say:
" Kata (forms) is the soul of martial arts. If you don't like them, you don't understand them. If you don't like them and think you understand them, you don't understand them."
I'm inclined to disagree, you're wrong in my opinion. If you say kata is the soul of karate or some other kata based system I wouldn't disagree. But kata is not the soul of every art unless you accept a broader definition of the term. Many arts don't use kata, therefore it can't be the soul of all martial arts.It's your opinion man, but that doesn't make it right.
OP
OP
I agree that you are entitled to disagree with my opinions. And you have done so.
lklawson
Grandmaster
Again, it goes back to definitions. What is a "Martial Art?" For that matter, what are "Kata?"
Is western civ. Dueling Sabre a Martial Art? I don't recall any of those which have anything resembling "Kata."
What about WWI era Bayonet? Is that a Martial Art? At least one of them has a solo Drill recorded. Is that a "Kata" and, if so, is that so integral to the art that it's the "soul" of it?
What about Military Saber/Broadsword? Jean Gaspard Le Marchant's military saber system has multiple two-man attack-parry-riposte style drills which seem pretty important to his idea of how to train new swordsmen. Are those "two-man kata" and, if so, are they so important as to be the "soul" of his system?
What about "martial dances?" Some western martial skills appear (to some researchers) to have used "dances" as important training methods and, in some cases, may be all that remains of the art. I'm thinking of stuff like the Scottish Dirk Dance, Droghedy's March, various folk dances like Ball de Bastons and Morris Dancing. Are those "kata?" Because they may be all that's left of the martial skills which they (might) represent, could they be the "soul" of the art now?
It's all about definitions. Bill's definitions seem to be very strongly focused on martial systems originating from Japan, Okinawa, and (I assume) China to some degree from roughly the mid-18th Century through the 20th (and beyond, likely). In the context of that time frame and origin, I suspect that most practitioners within that set would generally agree to a greater or lesser extent with the majority of his assertions.
However, like you, I don't limit my definition of martial arts being only those from Asia so, in my context, his definitions, and therefore observations, don't always work for me.
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Last edited:
No, I doubt the Spartans were trying to lose a few pounds; so, they can pick up chicks at the club. After all, clubs weren't invented until much later.
No, I doubt the Spartans were trying to lose a few pounds; so, they can pick up chicks at the club. After all, clubs weren't invented until much later.
Maybe those Spartans were party poopers, but I'll bet the Athenians made the bar-rounds. And the Romans.... well you get the idea.
Here's a nice tame image of some Romans at a tavern:
https://www.utexas.edu/courses/romanciv/Romancivimages21/tavern.jpg
BTW I enjoyed reading Bill's observations. Some have broad relevance, others probably relate more to his personal experiences. I remember when Bill first began posting on this forum he was newly embarking on his Martial Arts journey ... although as a former LEO and USMC he was already more experienced in martial reality than many of us will ever be. Now that he is a seasoned martial arts practitioner it's interesting to hear his reflections.
Last edited:
No, I doubt the Spartans were trying to lose a few pounds; so, they can pick up chicks at the club. After all, clubs weren't invented until much later.
Without bothering to do any actual research on the subject, I'm willing to bet that the first pub was invented within 48 hours of the development of a controlled fermentation process.
And the first lame pick up line was probably used within 8 hours of the first pub...
Ah, but the concept of clubbing was more scientific, and was what scientists did. That is, a group of egg heads would pool their money together for women and song... and beer. Sparta was not known for science.
