Style vs. Style.....hated argument?

[Cobra]

I am not sure about this site, but other martial art forums (like martial arts planet) hates the Style vs. Style argument.

What is this sites stance on Style vs. style. Does the site members hate it?

 

[Rich Parsons]

I am not sure about this site, but other martial art forums (like martial arts planet) hates the Style vs. Style argument.

What is this sites stance on Style vs. style. Does the site members hate it?

If one was to appoarch it in a technical manner, such as :

Modern Arnis does have small joint manipulation, yet it's over all technical ground work is not on the same level say as Brazillian Ju-Jitsu or Collegiate wrestling. How would a Modern Arnis person then take these techniques and apply then to the ground work. This would mean practice and more practice in most cases. Also consider the use of the weapon at hand with your grappling????

Yet, you could say the same thing, how could the BJJ practitioner use his techniques with a weapon?

Yet, in my mind, the discussion of this art is better than that art because . . . (* Insert something that someone will find insulting. *)

It usually comes down to this.

It is not the art it is the practitioner and how much PRACTICE they put into their techniques.

So almost all of these discussions end this way, or they end in a flame war.
This is why many people including myself do not like these discussions. As they are usually from a limited point of view and are or real close to style bashing. They read like commercials for the style of the person defending a style.

So, would have to say that this member does not like them. Yet, I could see where it would be technically possible to have a discussion, yet I still claim that it comes down to this: "It is not the art it is the practitioner and how much PRACTICE they put into their techniques."

 

[Marginal]

I am not sure about this site, but other martial art forums (like martial arts planet) hates the Style vs. Style argument.

What is this sites stance on Style vs. style. Does the site members hate it?

It's not so much a question of hating it. It's more a case of it having been done to death a thousand times over already. There's no clear resolution on such an argument. It's like arguing over religion and which monkey in the sky's best to worship. Pointless.

 

[Rainman]

If one was to appoarch it in a technical manner, such as :

Modern Arnis does have small joint manipulation, yet it's over all technical ground work is not on the same level say as Brazillian Ju-Jitsu or Collegiate wrestling. How would a Modern Arnis person then take these techniques and apply then to the ground work. This would mean practice and more practice in most cases. Also consider the use of the weapon at hand with your grappling????

Yet, you could say the same thing, how could the BJJ practitioner use his techniques with a weapon?

Yet, in my mind, the discussion of this art is better than that art because . . . (* Insert something that someone will find insulting. *)

It usually comes down to this.

It is not the art it is the practitioner and how much PRACTICE they put into their techniques.

So almost all of these discussions end this way, or they end in a flame war.
This is why many people including myself do not like these discussions. As they are usually from a limited point of view and are or real close to style bashing. They read like commercials for the style of the person defending a style.

So, would have to say that this member does not like them. Yet, I could see where it would be technically possible to have a discussion, yet I still claim that it comes down to this: "It is not the art it is the practitioner and how much PRACTICE they put into their techniques."

Or you could say it simply does not exist. Style is personal interpretation of the art and system is the art. System vs system... hard to do that as well some are geared towards sport some are self defense. Some deal a lot with weapons some don't have any. If a trained person uses a weapon on someone they will go to jail. If a trained person uses a weapon on multiple people with weapons their chances of survival have been dramatically increased.

So to me flame wars on this subject are not really logical- You need vitamin C- which to choose an apple or an orange?

:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

You need vitamin C- which to choose an apple or an orange?

:asian:

I eat an apple for breakfast and have a glass of OJ later in the morning as well or CranApple juice

 

[Rainman]

I eat an apple for breakfast and have a glass of OJ later in the morning as well or CranApple juice

And that kind of diversity will make you healthy.

 

[MJS]

I am not sure about this site, but other martial art forums (like martial arts planet) hates the Style vs. Style argument.

What is this sites stance on Style vs. style. Does the site members hate it?

I agree with Marginal on this as well. It has been talked about time after time after time, and some people get tired of it. Me..I enjoy talking about it!! IMO, it all comes down to the person and the defense of their art. Everybody wants to think that their art is the best one out there. If you look hard enough, you'll see it. For example, take Kenpo. I've had many heated discussion about the pros/cons of the art, and the funny thing is, is that no matter how many points are made, regardless of if they are valid or not, the debate is still not solved!

I look at it like this. Everything is worth taking a look at. If the person doing that art can make things work for them, then great. As long as the person is happy doing what they are doing, then I guess that is all that matters. Are there some things out there that, IMO, are much better than others? Absoltely!!!

Mike

 

[KennethKu]

Our style is better than yours! It is the best in the world! My Sensei says so! Therefore it must be true!!

 

[HardassHalfPint]

Stupid arguement is what it is. It never goes anywhere, and everyone degrades themselves to random ****-slinging.

Of course, my art is "useless, based on unreality, inherently dangerous to the practitioner, it has a better chance of getting one killed than helping him/her, and what is more it is nowhere near as good as wing-chun kungfu"

 

[MJS]

Yup, it really is a :deadhorse topic!! Like I said before...as long as the student doing the art is happy, I suppose thats all that matters. Although, if you really think about it, and looked at some of the arts out there, one would see some of the crazy things that are being taught. Of course we're gonna think to ourselves, "Wow!! That art sucks!! Doing that stuff in a real fight would get ya killed!!!!"

Mike

 

[Nightingale]

it's pretty much the consensus here that it is a dead horse...

This is an argument that can never truly be resolved, simply because you can't have a style independent of the people who practice it, and people have good days and bad days, and some work harder than others.

It's a safe bet to say that Bruce Lee is a better martial artist than I am. BUT, can one truly make the claim that Bruce's style is better than mine, simply because he could best me in a match? or did he just train harder at it?

 

[Cameron]

I think Nightingale made an excellent point.



It is in my humble opinion that the style that uses the mind will always be superior to the style that uses the mouth.

 

[kenpo12]

it's pretty much the consensus here that it is a dead horse...

This is an argument that can never truly be resolved, simply because you can't have a style independent of the people who practice it, and people have good days and bad days, and some work harder than others.

It's a safe bet to say that Bruce Lee is a better martial artist than I am. BUT, can one truly make the claim that Bruce's style is better than mine, simply because he could best me in a match? or did he just train harder at it?

I agree. It's like saying kenpo is more dimensional than boxing, which is probably true but I ain't about to start talking smack to Lennox Lewis because I think my art will beat his boxing.

 

[Cameron]

I agree. It's like saying kenpo is more dimensional than boxing, which is probably true but I ain't about to start talking smack to Lennox Lewis because I think my art will beat his boxing.

:roflmao:

 

[limubai2000]

"It is not the art it is the practitioner and how much PRACTICE they put into their techniques."

I firmly believe in the above quote, I was taught it from day 1 in Wing Chun.

My rather odd situation is that in our Academy we have 2 Jujitsu classes, 1 Kenpo class, and our Wing Chun class. By coincidence or design all the classes teach the above statement to their students so we never have any issues at the academy in fact some students cross train and just last night my Sifu rolled around with a Jujitsu instructor after class was over.

But the other 8 or so Jujitsu schools on Guam don't teach the above. Nearly every week I engage in converstations with Jujitsu students who claim they have the best art and they can always defeat me blah blah blah. To which I reply with the above (or close to it) and try to exit the conversation. This does not sway my conduct but it tends to get rather upsetting and irritating to keep engaging in a pointless dispute(?) of this nature. I give them the respect they deserve but it is tenuous at best as they obviously don't respect Wing Chun or me as a student of such. I tend to refer to them as the "un-enlightened martial artists".