Street Fighter vs Martial Artist - if both have 10 yrs exp, who will win?

[Andrew Green]

Choki Motobu only has one thing to say about that. He seems pretty absolute in his position.

He's one guy with a opinion, regardless of how good he was or how famous he was, he's one guy with a opinion. Personally I'm thankful we have performance arts as well as I rather enjoy a good kung fu movie, wires and everything

 

[TSDTexan]

He's one guy with a opinion, regardless of how good he was or how famous he was, he's one guy with a opinion. Personally I'm thankful we have performance arts as well as I rather enjoy a good kung fu movie, wires and everything

True but I hate fraud. I hate people who take money and teach that what they trained in, and teach is going to help some one defend themselves in a fight.
When it definitely won't.


Not every art is absolutely going to give you a win every time. But some arts will never work. They are totally broken.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

True but I hate fraud. I hate people who take money and teach that what they trained in, and teach is going to help some one defend themselves in a fight.
When it definitely won't.


Not every art is absolutely going to give you a win every time. But some arts will never work. They are totally broken.

I think everyone hates actual fraud. Many of us are frustrated by those who seem to think they are teaching something effective, but apparently are not (when viewed through an informed eye).

But there are groups of arts that don't fall into either of those categories, which are also not much use for self-defense. I've met people who trained entirely for soft competition (not hard-contact stuff) who had no illusion that their training was all that effective for combat. I've met people who didn't seem to care whether they were learning something for defensive use or not, because it was fun and/or cool. And those folks were all being served well by their schools. To them, it was another alternative to choose from, like gymnastics or football.

 

[TSDTexan]

I think everyone hates actual fraud. Many of us are frustrated by those who seem to think they are teaching something effective, but apparently are not (when viewed through an informed eye).

But there are groups of arts that don't fall into either of those categories, which are also not much use for self-defense. I've met people who trained entirely for soft competition (not hard-contact stuff) who had no illusion that their training was all that effective for combat. I've met people who didn't seem to care whether they were learning something for defensive use or not, because it was fun and/or cool. And those folks were all being served well by their schools. To them, it was another alternative to choose from, like gymnastics or football.

Martial arts. Yes, it's kind of like a venn diagram.
Some arts are sport. Some are war.
Some are amusing diversions.
Some are religious, and/or political.
Some are philosophical.
Some are practical.
Some are art.

Sport: win or lose mentality but just a game.

War: life or death mentality, it's about survival.

Entertainment: this is fun, don't let it get boring mindset.

Religious: any of the following: aikido, chi balls, 0 falsability, assertions taken whole without a gain of salt. Personal development.

Philosophical... it about the "DO"
Practical... it's about the "Jutsu"

Art: it's not just a potentially dangerous dance... it's esthetically pleasing and even beautiful.


They don't have to be mutually exclusive. The Art doesn't stand alone.... the practitioner can bring his/her own influence into the expression and experience of the art.

 

[Andrew Green]

True but I hate fraud. I hate people who take money and teach that what they trained in, and teach is going to help some one defend themselves in a fight.
When it definitely won't.


Not every art is absolutely going to give you a win every time. But some arts will never work. They are totally broken.

This is something different. This is teaching something and claiming that it is something it isn't. That's very different then teaching wushu and claiming it is performance. Or teaching Tai Chi and saying it is mainly for health.

 

[TSDTexan]

This is something different. This is teaching something and claiming that it is something it isn't. That's very different then teaching wushu and claiming it is performance. Or teaching Tai Chi and saying it is mainly for health.

It's all depends on the tai chi.
American park tai chi is often broken having been divorced from its combative roots, sometimes as much as 4 or 5 generations.

Get an authentic yang stylist from China and he will actually be able to use it in an attempted mugging.

The fraud can be when a park tai chi practioneer... thinks his art is actually intact, and finds it isn't the hard way.