Some thoughts about discussing the martial arts

[Steve]

OK! So you still haven't acknowledged that calling me coy was an insult and when I pointed it out to you you say that it is not an insult where you come from and deliberately use the term again. So that is accepting responsibility for your role?

K-man, my intention was to use the term that best described the situation, to identify a specific behavior that I disagree with. I could have reframed it, maybe, and said, "K-man, when you post in this way, it leads me to question your sincerity."

I don't even know why we are having this conversation. The respect I had for you disappeared after your PM when you started attacking me and accused me of hounding Hanzou. You brought up the bit about BJJ, MMA and fanboys. Well let me say this. I have no problem with BJJ. I have no issue with MMA and I have no problem with fans of BJJ and MMA. That leaves Drop Bear, Hanzou and you.

Speaking of honesty, let's be clear here about the PM. First, I think it's a damned shame. I sent you a note and Hanzou a note at the same time. I suggested to you that, as a mentor, we have an opportunity to try and encourage posters like Hanzou to be constructive and I was (and remain) concerned that you and a few others seem to pile on new posters. I didn't realize at the time that you weren't interested in that and had already written him off. I will always agree with posts I agree with, regardless of the poster, and disagree with posts I disagree with, regardless of the poster. That I happen to think that Hanzou has some good ideas seems to make you mad.

So let's start with Drop Bear. He says what he says from his position as a bouncer. I don't have a problem with that. He trains MMA. I don't have an issue with that. He might make a comment about something and I might agree with him or I may disagree with him. That's what makes for discussion. I have no doubt he is the person he claims to be. Maybe he is trolling. So what? A lot of people do the same thing. Why did you make a statement that Drop Bear is causing conflict?

I actually don't. I think drop bear is a solid contributor to the site. He is often hounded for his opinions, and derided.

I'll move on to Hanzou. Is there a conflict? Yes. Why is there a conflict? Well Hanzou has been putting himself out there as an expert. When someone dismisses some of the world's top martial artists as ineffective or worse alarm bells should start ringing. When someone starts arguing against people who have been training for decades in an area he has no experience alarm bells should start ringing. When the guys on this forum make statements saying that he just doesn't understand and he still claims he knows better alarm bells should be ringing. When someone claims to hold a high rank in a martial art that turns out to be Shodan, alarm bells should be ringing. Now someone criticising a 9th dan person should be reasonable experienced you would think. Someone putting down a 6th dan guy, recognised as one of the UK's top martial artists, from another style should be similar rank you would assume. Normally I couldn't give a toss about rank as long as the persons heart is in the right place. Turns out Hanzou doesn't have a BJJ black belt. We don't know his rank. No wonder he was dismissive when I said one of my training partners is a BJJ black belt.

I think Hanzou has a position that is comprised of opinions, and he's never shown an unwillingness to further explain his rationale. Some of his opinions I agree with, and some I don't. Following him around, pulling baggage from old threads into new ones, piling on and generally perpetuating conflict isn't good for conversation. I think if you treated him more respectfully, he would respond in kind. I like that we have some other BJJ guys around and I am very interested in encouraging more participation. And so, I agree with him where I think he makes a good point.

So where does this leave you? I called BS early in the piece. You sided with Hanzou and we have had a circus for months. Sometimes we can be nice and sometimes we have to call a spade a bloody shovel. This has been a festering sore for months. It's time it was lanced.

This "us vs them" mentality is at the root of the issue. I didn't "side with Hanzou" or against you. I'm glad you're speaking plainly. Maybe I shouldn't have reached out to you. I send like 10 PMs a year, so it was something I thought about prior to sending it. It was a good faith attempt to address this conflict months ago before it became caustic.

You got one thing right in your post. Sometimes we write things we shouldn't, and perhaps this is one of those times, but to be frank, I'm over it. There has been a poisonous atmosphere for too long.

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[K-man]

Why do you continue to smash people, then? You don't seem to see how aggressive you are in your posts.

And this is the second poster you are calling dishonest. In what way do you think drop bear is dishonest? I don't agree with everything he posts, but I find his candor and willingness to speak plainly very honest and refreshing. I Have not seen anything in his posts that suggests that he exaggerates the truth or lies about his experience.

LOL. Where did Cirdan call Drop Bear dishonest?

I don`t expect to be smashed too often in conversations because I try to express myself honestly. If I have ideas I will present them as such rather than hit people over the head with them.

I might have thought "trying to express myself honestly" meant just that. I would suggest that aggressiveness follows ill informed comment or where posters deliberately flame such as you are doing here.

K-man, my intention was to use the term that best described the situation, to identify a specific behavior that I disagree with. I could have reframed it, maybe, and said, "K-man, when you post in this way, it leads me to question your sincerity."

So you meant what you said? Cool. I would be banned from the board if I were to post what I now think of you.

Speaking of honesty, let's be clear here about the PM. First, I think it's a damned shame. I sent you a note and Hanzou a note at the same time. I suggested to you that, as a mentor, we have an opportunity to try and encourage posters like Hanzou to be constructive and I was (and remain) concerned that you and a few others seem to pile on new posters. I didn't realize at the time that you weren't interested in that and had already written him off. I will always agree with posts I agree with, regardless of the poster, and disagree with posts I disagree with, regardless of the poster. That I happen to think that Hanzou has some good ideas seems to make you mad.

Good to see you are now being honest. Your phraseology suggests that in the past you have been less than honest ... or does the use of the word have different meaning according to the user?

I have never disagreed with Hanzou's "good ideas". I'm not sure they were actually 'ideas' but the meaning of words seems to confuse you at times. I would suggest Hanzou was putting forward opinion that in the main you agreed with. I don't think I have seen one comment from you disagreeing with his 'ideas'. Hanzou put forward some good opinion on several of his posts on various grappling techniques. None of those posts "made me mad". Posts that made me 'mad' were the ones denigrating other styles of martial arts, running down some of the world's most respected martial art practitioners, where he was rejecting information provided by multiple experienced practitioners (not just disagreeing with me) and of course when he admitted enjoying needling people. Ironically, you did not speak out against any of those posts so one can only assume that you agree with them. On the old board where we could actually see who liked posts, you liked some of his more highly inflammatory posts. Hmm!

But back to your PM. I deferred to your request and backed off. What did you say to Hanzou as it obviously had no effect? Well actually it did. He seemed to be encouraged to post even more inflammatory statements which brought me back in and to this toxic position we find today. So you possibly told him; "K-man is an arsehole, I'll try to get him to hold back, but don't be discouraged Hanzou, keep up the good work. Stick it right up them." Close?

I actually don't. I think drop bear is a solid contributor to the site. He is often hounded for his opinions, and derided.

This is an interesting take! You don't what? I suppose I'm being 'coy' by asking what you mean. I am assuming that you don't agree with my opinion of a Drop Bear.

What did I say? ...
"So let's start with Drop Bear. He says what he says from his position as a bouncer. I don't have a problem with that. He trains MMA. I don't have an issue with that. He might make a comment about something and I might agree with him or I may disagree with him. That's what makes for discussion. I have no doubt he is the person he claims to be. Maybe he is trolling. So what? A lot of people do the same thing. Why did you make a statement that Drop Bear is causing conflict?"

So I made five statements, one of which is a 'maybe' and you wrote that you "don't". You don't what? You don't agree with my statements or you don't think my statements are true? Or are you just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing?

I think Hanzou has a position that is comprised of opinions, and he's never shown an unwillingness to further explain his rationale. Some of his opinions I agree with, and some I don't.

So which of his opinions do you disagree with? You disagree with other people all the time but I've not once seen you disagree with Hanzou. As to explaining his rationale. I have no doubt about that, where he has been asked to clarify his position on a grappling technique, he has done that. It is a totally different story where people have tried to explain to him that his position on Karate or Aikido or Wing Chun was wrong. In those instances he doesn't ask for 'proof', he demands 'proof', and then rejects what is provided because he has never seen it himself, or that it is just a 'demonstration'.

Following him around, pulling baggage from old threads into new ones, piling on and generally perpetuating conflict isn't good for conversation.

You are obsessed with people following people around. I have never followed anyone around. I post in threads I have an interest. Hanzou has posted in dozens of threads that I haven't even looked at. I haven't posted in any of those. The ones I have posted in are the ones I have an active interest in and feel I can contribute. As to pulling baggage from old threads into new ones ... sometimes quite justified when he writes "show me where I said that". (For what it's worth, others have been far more successful at this than me.) So you can rest easy. I haven't been following Hanzou around and I have no intention of following him around in the future either.

I think if you treated him more respectfully, he would respond in kind.

I did and he didn't.

I like that we have some other BJJ guys around and I am very interested in encouraging more participation. And so, I agree with him where I think he makes a good point.

I agree completely, but they don't need to diss the other styles. Leave that for Bullshido.

This "us vs them" mentality is at the root of the issue.

Sorry, not being 'coy' but who is 'us' and who is 'them'? As there is no sentiment against BJJ or MMA, I can only assume it is now personalities. Ah, here it is ...

It's not just Hanzou and Drop Bear and me causing conflict. It's not just the "BJJ Fanboys" or the MMA fanboys who are causing conflict.

There's the 'us' and I presume 'them' is the rest of us.

I didn't "side with Hanzou" or against you.

Thank goodness you cleared that up. I was really beginning to wonder"

I'm glad you're speaking plainly.

Refreshing isn't it?

Maybe I shouldn't have reached out to you. I send like 10 PMs a year, so it was something I thought about prior to sending it. It was a good faith attempt to address this conflict months ago before it became caustic.

Not at all. At the time I appreciated the contact. It's a shame that Hanzou didn't respond positively to your PM.

I agree wholeheartedly

What better than to end on a positive?

 

[Steve]

K-man, I wish I could go back and read what I actually sent you and to Hanzou, but they're long gone. He's welcome to share what I sent him, if he can and chooses, but I assure you it was not what you think.

For examples of when I disagree with Hanzou, there happens to be a very recent example in the "IJF bans Judo athletes" thread. As I said before, if I agree with a post, I agree with it regardless of the poster. And conversely, if I disagree with one, it is regardless of the poster.

Honesty is a big one. Let's talk about that for a moment. Cirdan overtly accused me of being dishonest, but couldn't or wouldn't elaborate publicly or privately. Now, you're saying (really insinuating) that I've been dishonest. Sure, you don't come right out and say it (ie, speaking plainly), but when you comment on my phraseology, your meaning comes through clearly. I'll invite you to share with me publicly or privately an instance of dishonesty, because I take that very seriously. I am a stubborn guy and I know that I often wade in hip deep into these conversations even when I shouldn't. If you're doing something that I disagree with, I will say so, and that seems to me to be very honest.

Regarding the use of "us vs them," I'll try to explain. When someone sides with something, they are siding against something else. Choosing sides means something pretty specific. I choose this and not that. If one chooses a side, they are opting to associate with that side and against another. For example, if someone is "pro choice", they are siding against "pro life."

When you say that I "sided with Hanzou", in the context of this discussion, the implication is that I sided against you. I reject the entire line of reasoning. I neither sided with Hanzou nor against you. Rather, I agreed with Hanzou where he posted something I agreed with.

I also want to be clear, I don't have any contact with either Hanzou or Drop Bear outside of the public forums, and so don't want to imply we're a cabal of any kind. In fact, Hanzou didn't respond to my PM to him, so outside of that one contact in PM months ago, we aren't an "us." I mentioned the names in a sentence only because these seem to be certain users on the butt end of derisive comments and passive/aggressive attempts to "help" educate them. I could add other usernames to the list, but didn't think it would be necessary.

 

[K-man]

K-man, I wish I could go back and read what I actually sent you and to Hanzou, but they're long gone. He's welcome to share what I sent him, if he can and chooses, but I assure you it was not what you think.

Steve, I don't care in the least what you said to Hanzou. All that is important to me are your actions after you asked me to pull back.

For examples of when I disagree with Hanzou, there happens to be a very recent example in the "IJF bans Judo athletes" thread. As I said before, if I agree with a post, I agree with it regardless of the poster. And conversely, if I disagree with one, it is regardless of the poster.

Wow! Hanzou says that he doesn't think Judo is all that popular and you say, "I don't know, Hanzou. It's very popular around here and has been for a long time." Wow! That's a real biggie! I'll bet that really had Hanzou asking himself questions.

Honesty is a big one. Let's talk about that for a moment. Cirdan overtly accused me of being dishonest, but couldn't or wouldn't elaborate publicly or privately.

I dispute your claim that that is what he meant. I read it and didn't see that at all. On the other hand when I questioned you on the use of the word 'coy' you confirmed that you meant it. In fact you went further and said you should have called me insincere. Cool, if that's what you think.

Now, you're saying (really insinuating) that I've been dishonest. Sure, you don't come right out and say it (ie, speaking plainly), but when you comment on my phraseology, your meaning comes through clearly. I'll invite you to share with me publicly or privately an instance of dishonesty, because I take that very seriously. I am a stubborn guy and I know that I often wade in hip deep into these conversations even when I shouldn't. If you're doing something that I disagree with, I will say so, and that seems to me to be very honest.

Now lets's look at the use of English. Saying something, "you are being insincere" and insinuating, "you are being coy" can be the same or it can be different. That's why you clarified your meaning. Steve, I have never accused you of being dishonest. I was referring to you choice of language. You accused Cirdan of calling Drop Bear dishonest because he used the phrase "trying to express myself honestly" then you used a similar expression yourself. The difference was of course, he used the word in context where you used it out of context then took my reply out of context as well. Ain't English a *****.

Regarding the use of "us vs them," I'll try to explain. When someone sides with something, they are siding against something else. Choosing sides means something pretty specific. I choose this and not that. If one chooses a side, they are opting to associate with that side and against another. For example, if someone is "pro choice", they are siding against "pro life."

Really? Thank you for the clarification. Who would have guessed?

When you say that I "sided with Hanzou", in the context of this discussion, the implication is that I sided against you. I reject the entire line of reasoning. I neither sided with Hanzou nor against you. Rather, I agreed with Hanzou where he posted something I agreed with.

That isn't what you said earlier and it is not what is generally meant by "us vs them", and remember, it was you that introduced 'us vs them'. As to siding with Hanzou against me ... I didn't say that or mean that. Whether you 'sided' with Hanzou or whether you just ignored the posts where he was out of line is immaterial. The fact that you weren't critical in those situations despite being present in the conversation is implicit approval.

I also want to be clear, I don't have any contact with either Hanzou or Drop Bear outside of the public forums, and so don't want to imply we're a cabal of any kind. In fact, Hanzou didn't respond to my PM to him, so outside of that one contact in PM months ago, we aren't an "us." I mentioned the names in a sentence only because these seem to be certain users on the butt end of derisive comments and passive/aggressive attempts to "help" educate them. I could add other usernames to the list, but didn't think it would be necessary.

I don't care whether you email the President. I'm not interested in who you talk to and I accept there is no 'cabal', (nice word). It is reassuring that you guys weren't plotting my downfall. Why am I not surprised that Hazou didn't respond. Didn't that give you any indication of what was going to happen?

 

[Hanzou]

Just to clarify, I never pretended to be an expert in anything. I have experienced many different martial arts, and hold high belts in two of them. I was around karate for a long time before I actually practiced it, and everything I've said about the art comes from those experiences. I just happen to use Youtube vids to verify those experiences because they mirror my own. I don't think its disparaging to point out that grappling simply isn't very prevalent in karate.

I also don't think its disparaging to point out that some styles have pretty hilarious ways to address grappling situations. People put that stuff out there, and its perfectly within rights to criticize it, or even get a chuckle out of it. I've been meaning to put up a vid of how an Aikido sensei put up a ridiculous way to counter open guard. I don't put those up to bag Aikido, I put them up because they're pretty funny.

As for my comments about the posters getting angry at my posts and me getting a chuckle out of it; I just thought it was humorous that simple comments could get people so upset. I mean, I said that Wado-Ryu is a combination of Karate and Jujutsu and people went crazy. I just thought the reaction was completely unwarranted and kind of silly, so I laughed about it. The off-topic comments (some at my expense) were kind of funny too. However, the last thing I desire is to attack people's art. I'm simply curious about how other arts deal with grappling, because that was never a factor when I was in the striking arts, and that lack was a big factor in my migration from Karate to Judo and eventually Bjj.

I actually did read Steve's PM, and meant to respond to it. It was simply some advice on how to interact with others on the forum, and even to lay off of Kman because he thought I was attacking him too much. I've meant to tell him "thanks" for some time now, but I never got around to it. So thanks Steve for the advice, it was appreciated.

 

[K-man]

Just to clarify, I never pretended to be an expert in anything. I have experienced many different martial arts, and hold high belts in two of them.

Sorry Hanzou, you don't hold any high belts, that is one of the problems. You have a black belt in Shotokan and a purple belt in BJJ. That is not demeaning your achievements, just a fact.

I was around karate for a long time before I actually practiced it, and everything I've said about the art comes from those experiences. I just happen to use Youtube vids to verify those experiences because they mirror my own. I don't think its disparaging to point out that grappling simply isn't very prevalent in karate.

I agree that pointing out grappling isn't prevalent in karate isn't disparaging. It is the truth. Grappling unfortunately isn't prevalent in a lot of karate because those styles of karate went down the sport track. That was the type of karate you trained and despite the fact that Shotokan is a solid style of Martial Art,mount ground it less than satisfactory, exactly the experience I had with Goju Kai, although I recognised a lot of good things in my previous training too. There is a lot of grappling in the Okinawan styles, something you obviously haven't come across.

There are good things on YouTube and there are some really poor things on YouTube. Selecting bad examples of an art and holding them up to ridicule is not funny to serious practitioners of those styles. When they complain that that is not indicative of their training, demanding video of their training is not the way to win friends.

I also don't think its disparaging to point out that some styles have pretty hilarious ways to address grappling situations. People put that stuff out there, and its perfectly within rights to criticize it, or even get a chuckle out of it. I've been meaning to put up a vid of how an Aikido sensei put up a ridiculous way to counter open guard. I don't put those up to bag Aikido, I put them up because they're pretty funny.

No. They might be funny to you. People put all sorts of stuff on YouTube. We have had people on MT who consider themselves God's gift to the martial arts. They even put up their own videos to show us how good they are. That's when you have a right to be critical. For the rest, keep it to yourself and laugh at it on private if you like. Putting it up on MT to ridicule it just makes you a jerk.

As for my comments about the posters getting angry at my posts and me getting a chuckle out of it; I just thought it was humorous that simple comments could get people so upset. I mean, I said that Wado-Ryu is a combination of Karate and Jujutsu and people went crazy. I just thought the reaction was completely unwarranted and kind of silly, so I laughed about it.

Wado Ryu is not a combination of Karate and Jujutso. It is a genuine karate style where Otsuka combined elements of his Jujutsu with karate to create his own style, Wado Ryu. If we look at BJJ we could just as easily say BJJ is just a combination on wrestling and Judo. That would be to sell it short. BJJ is BJJ. A system that has combined elements of other styles of MA and honed them to a high level. Nothing humourus at all, especially to the Wado guys.

The off-topic comments (some at my expense) were kind of funny too. However, the last thing I desire is to attack people's art. I'm simply curious about how other arts deal with grappling, because that was never a factor when I was in the striking arts, and that lack was a big factor in my migration from Karate to Judo and eventually Bjj.

If you were curious about something you only need to ask in an enquiring way. Not from a position of; "this is really stupid, what do you think?"

I actually did read Steve's PM, and meant to respond to it. It was simply some advice on how to interact with others on the forum, and even to lay off of Kman because he thought I was attacking him too much. I've meant to tell him "thanks" for some time now, but I never got around to it. So thanks Steve for the advice, it was appreciated.

You can attack me as much as you like, I've been around a fair while and I'm not sensitive. But please, challenge me with an open mind. There is a very small chance that I might have gathered a few tips over the years that might be of value to you on your journey.

 

[K-man]

So Hanzou, what part do you disagree with?

 

[Hanzou]

Just about everything. However, I really don't feel like discussing it, so I just pressed the disagree button.

 

[Chris Parker]

yeah about that. I have been hitting this wrong trying to use logic and evidence.

No, you don't. There is no logic in your posts, there is bias, prejudice, a real lack of understanding and information, and a denial of any others information and evidence.

if anecdotal evidence is the main hand to play. It is going to be easier for me.

Good. But remember that that is the most common form you're going to get from others… dismissing it when you have nothing to counter it with is not logical, nor any basis for good conversation. In other words… listen… you might just learn something.

see i am a very average sport guy. I am not a pro or ranked fighter.

Okay.

but having done too many years bouncing and engaged in far too much violence. I am a self defence veteran.

I don't know that I'd class that as "self defence"… as, well, it isn't. Handling violence? Sure. But, broadly, that's not the same thing.

i am an avoidance veteran.

i am a de-escalation veteran.

Okay. Might I suggest that you impart some of that experience, then? So far, that hasn't been what you've been talking about in the majority of the posts you've made…

and most of this forum is street.

No, it's really not. There are about 100 different forums here… only one is "street" by definition. While it can be a part of many discussions in many areas, that's not the way it's set up.

There is a difference between work and high school.

in high school if you don't like someone you don't have to function around them and it is an important part of who you are.

in work if you don't like someone tough. you have to get over it.there are more important things.

I don't know what high school you went to, but… can't say I agree with that…

Look, there are differences… but that, I don't think, is really one of them… at least, not a major one…

the forum is probably fifty fifty. And although being nice is good. If you interact with others there is going to be conflict.

No, there is the potential for conflict… if there is conflict whenever you deal with anyone, then mate, you have issues that need to be addressed.

i don't think that has been addressed. In all this how to get along posting.

It hasn't been addressed as it's not the reality for most here.

me i don't care. I like to fight. I like to disagree. I believe in resisted training.

and that applies to my ideas as well as my techniques.

Then you're on the wrong board, if you're looking for a fight every time you post.

Look, heated discussion is one thing… passionate debate as well. And yes, that can get towards the idea of conflict… but, if you're posting looking for a fight, even expecting one, you are seriously in the wrong place… you're going against the spirit of this board, and the TOS you agreed to. The desire for fights, and the appearance of trying to start them (with obtuse posting, denial of anyone else's point of view, and so forth) is really, genuinely, the definition of trolling. And that will see you banned.

this is sparring. You get smashed. You get tapped. Re set re adjust move on.

No, this is not sparring… this is conversation. No-one here is looking to get "smashed" or "tapped"… and bluntly, you don't have the tools for that… so I suggest you re-assess why you're here.

And you might want to remember, that a number here, including myself, don't spar… in my case, I just go straight to severing limbs.

and before anybody thinks i am trying to advocate this becoming 4 Chan.

shades of grey.

I don't even know what you mean by this… you comment that you like to fight, that all conversation involves people getting "smashed" or "tapped"… and then say it's shades of grey? Really?

sparring is a conversation.

And i am not the first guy to come up with that idea by the way.

MAMA Martial Arts Mommy Archives Sparring is a Conversation Not a Monologue

Yeah, you're not getting what is being said in that article… sure, sparring can be looked at as a conversation (an exchange between two or more), rather than a monologue (a single viewpoint expressed by one person)… but what that's meaning is that, when you're sparring, you should be as conscious of the other person, and what they're bringing as you are focused on what you're doing yourself… the admonition is to avoid focusing solely on yourself, and limit the lessons you can take from the engagement.

There is no correlation to say that therefore, conversation is sparring… it's not.

no i don't. What is the difference. Why isn't punching people in the face ruder than disagreement?

That's not what was being said. But, to give you an answer, in a sparring match, both of you are engaging actively, knowing the parameters and aims, knowing what you're getting into… you know the other guy is going to try to hit you in the face, and you get to hit him back. It's an agreed upon situation. In a conversation, on an assumed friendly platform, to have someone try to "smash you", when that's not the agreed upon situation or environment, then yeah, it's pretty rude, inflammatory, and so on… and, again, in the context of this board, trolling.

For the record, I keep harping on that to highlight to you how you're representing yourself, in the hopes that you recognise it, and can change for the better.

why?

it seems if i don't accept i may get smashed in conversation. I am more likely to take offence.

like if i get punched in sparring and take offence.

Let's put it this way… even in sparring, there are considerations and parameters… let's say you're rolling in BJJ… positions, submission, escape only… no striking, no flesh grabs, and so on… and your partner decides to just start slamming their elbow into your head. It's not part of that sparring construct… and when you tell them that that's not this session, even if you also spar with striking at other times, he just laughs and says "hey dude, it's fighting… ya gotta be ready for this!", how do you take it?

It's the same here… again, sparring and conversation are very different… especially where this board is concerned… suddenly raining down elbows just isn't appropriate. It really doesn't matter what you "accept" in terms of your take on conversation, as it is completely besides the point.

i know why. Because I test my ideas against resistance. Sometimes my ideas are wrong. Sometimes my ideas are not supported well enough.

No, you don't (test your ideas against resistance)… you bluntly stubbornly refuse to accept any such resistance. To put it in terms you might understand, it's like someone trying to train an arm bar (note: train, not rolling) with you, and you not giving the position to practice it in… and then claiming that they don't know how to choke you. That's not resistance.

if you don't expect to get smashed in conversation. What is your reasoning behind that?

Because it's a conversation…? Seriously, if you don't get that, take a good, hard look at the way you interact with people.

So Hanzou, what part do you disagree with?

Just about everything. However, I really don't feel like discussing it, so I just pressed the disagree button.

Really? For the record, there was pretty much nothing in K-man's post that was incorrect… quite the opposite… if you disagreed with it, I'd recommend taking a serious look at what he was saying… and your personal behaviour here, as K-man's assessment is damn well on the money.

 

[Chris Parker]

I suppose you have nothing to add, Hanzou….?

 

[Hanzou]

I suppose you have nothing to add, Hanzou….?

Is there really anything to add or discuss when you believe the other side of the discussion is completely wrong from the outset?

 

[Chris Parker]

Sure, there is… for one thing, I don't see anything in my, or K-man's posts, that are "completely wrong from the outset"…. yours, drop bears, etc, yeah… so I'm curious as to what exactly you feel is wrong in our posts… do you feel you're being misrepresented? Are we putting words in your mouth (or fingers)?

 

[Hanzou]

Sure, there is… for one thing, I don't see anything in my, or K-man's posts, that are "completely wrong from the outset"…. yours, drop bears, etc, yeah… so I'm curious as to what exactly you feel is wrong in our posts… do you feel you're being misrepresented? Are we putting words in your mouth (or fingers)?

Well just look at Kman's post. In the other thread I was the most evil s.o.b. on MT for pointing out a lack of grappling in karate. Some of that came from Kman himself. Now in this thread pointing that out is not only not disparaging, but it's the truth. Awesome!

As for the videos of traditional stylists doing weird grappling things, if you go over to the Hapkido forum, we had a really good discussion about a Hapkido group doing a bad armbar and then proceeding to counter said bad armbar. A couple of posters tried to hop in that thread and derail it, but they were ignored and the great conversation continued. We had a similar (mostly) positive discussion in the Wing Chun forum about anti-grappling, though it got heated in some spots. So I disagree that posting those videos make me a "jerk", or that such vids troll the forum. On the contrary, I feel that they spark a great conversation.

 

[Tez3]

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree that posting random videos of people not performing very well makes for 'great' discussion. It will depend on what you are after whether you consider trying to wind people up a good result or not, and as for assuming that people were raging about your posts, well, they weren't. They had tried patiently explaining what they do, they tried, patiently explaining again what they do but then when it's obvious it's not going to make a blind bit of difference posting when others have an agenda they got fed up, not frothing at the mouth, just fed up.
Ignoring posters doesn't make for 'good conversation' because it's only your opinion that they were trying to 'derail' your thread. perhaps they had something valuable to add but it didn't agree with what you were saying.
I think too that people read into what others write seeing only what they want to see not what is actually written, I think Hanzou's post here amply demonstrates that in what he thinks K-man said.

 

[Hanzou]

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree that posting random videos of people not performing very well makes for 'great' discussion.

Good discussion from posting random videos of people not performing well #1:

Help me out Hapkido folks... MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

Good discussion from posting random videos of people not performing well #2:

Some more thoughts on anti grappling . MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

It will depend on what you are after whether you consider trying to wind people up a good result or not, and as for assuming that people were raging about your posts, well, they weren't. They had tried patiently explaining what they do, they tried, patiently explaining again what they do but then when it's obvious it's not going to make a blind bit of difference posting when others have an agenda they got fed up, not frothing at the mouth, just fed up.

I do believe that the only thing that happened in the previous thread is that you posted some vids of Wado Ryu guys doing grappling within the Bunkai, and me saying that Wado is a combination of Karate and Jujutsu, and then you and some other posters began making bizarre posts about drinking.

Please note again, that spawned from one post of me stating that Wado is a combo of Karate and Jujutsu.

Ignoring posters doesn't make for 'good conversation' because it's only your opinion that they were trying to 'derail' your thread. perhaps they had something valuable to add but it didn't agree with what you were saying.

I was talking about the Hapkido thread. If you read that thread you'll see quite a few derail attempts in an otherwise fruitful conversation.

I think too that people read into what others write seeing only what they want to see not what is actually written, I think Hanzou's post here amply demonstrates that in what he thinks K-man said.

How ironic...

 

[Tez3]

LOL, at 'some Wado guys', only the founder. Ohtsuka Sensei didn't die until the 1980s so we have first hand information from him about how Wado Ryu started, what it's aims were, where the grappling came from etc etc. Of course I expect you'll say he's wrong.

Derail or disagree?

 

[Tez3]

The 'drinking' comments were an attempt, in vain as it turns out, to put a little humour into the thread before it turned into the disaster it did become, ie like lets have a drink on this and chat like adults. A sense of humour is invaluable, also not imagining people frothing at the mouth or getting in a tizzy because people disagree.
So what's yours? mine's a glass of white wine.

 

[tshadowchaser]

Myself I like discussing the arts over a beer or a glass of moonshine.
after a while the discussions or at my side of it gets very mellow.


WAAA cant find my drinking smiley

 

[Hanzou]

LOL, at 'some Wado guys', only the founder. Ohtsuka Sensei didn't die until the 1980s so we have first hand information from him about how Wado Ryu started, what it's aims were, where the grappling came from etc etc. Of course I expect you'll say he's wrong.

Derail or disagree?

Not the point. I was saying that the craziness began just from me saying that Wado is a combo of Karate and jujutsu in one post.

I also notice that you're not saying anything about the good/great discussions that spawned from posting random videos of people not performing well.

 

[ballen0351]

I also notice that you're not saying anything about the good/great discussions that spawned from posting random videos of people not performing well.

They are not great discussions because of your input. You posted the videos to Make fun of the people and the styles. Any good or great info came from other posters