What is the "best" martial art, pt 2

[lklawson]

or a dictionary

<sigh> I hope that's not how this is going to go.

Look, you were unclear. It was anything but "self explanatory." And, additionally, a great many disagree with what appears to be your methodology and your thesis that fights "collapse" in this manner or that the stated methodology accurately reflects "real life."

If you want to debate the merits of your above stated "7 ranges" methodology, please, by all means do so, but don't be a wang. That won't get anything except chest-puffing, derision, ridicule, or (at best) being dismissed out of hand.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Kwon Bup]

That's why I stated its not set in stone and I teach my students to defend themselves in these ranges. Of course if a knife or any weapon is involved..the distance is closer and you adjust accordingly. I am speak of defending yourself at these distances.

So I completely disagree with your statement.

 

[Kwon Bup]

I n

<sigh> I hope that's not how this is going to go.

Look, you were unclear. It was anything but "self explanatory." And, additionally, a great many disagree with what appears to be your methodology and your thesis that fights "collapse" in this manner or that the stated methodology accurately reflects "real life."

If you want to debate the merits of your above stated "7 ranges" methodology, please, by all means do so, but don't be a wang. That won't get anything except chest-puffing, derision, ridicule, or (at best) being dismissed out of hand.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

3 guys on this thread is a great many?
I had already stated It wasn't set in stone. Not sure about your other comment about being a wanker as yours appeared to be Just a scholastic insult. I never claimed to be a writer but as always with the fabulous long timers it's just insults...have a great day.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Of course if a knife or any weapon is involved..the distance is closer and you adjust accordingly.

Well.... not really. Weapons do come in different lengths, you know. How close you're going to get with a knife depends on things like the size/shape of the blade and the specific way it's being used. If the weapon is a baseball bat or cane, the distance won't really be closer. If it's a staff (like, say, a broom or mop handle) it almost certainly will NOT be close. And if it's a gun, then it's likely to be even longer (assuming the person with the gun isn't stupid enough to give up their reach advantage).

 

[lklawson]

That's why I stated its not set in stone and I teach my students to defend themselves in these ranges.

But these "ranges" are exceptionally fluid, transition in the blink of an eye, and are not always the same between the combatants.

Of course if a knife or any weapon is involved..the distance is closer and you adjust accordingly.

Closer? It is?

I am speak of defending yourself at these distances.

But these "distances" are exceptionally fluid, transition in the blink of an eye, and are not always (seldom ever) the same between the combatants.

So I completely disagree with your statement.

I made several statements. Which ones do you disagree with and why? Is it my statement that what is close range for me may be long range for someone else? Ever wonder why Vagus odds-makers always want to know the reach on each fighter?

For example, the relative distances at which these two fighters are effective are different. One has a much greater range than the other.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Dirty Dog]

3 guys on this thread is a great many?

People do read something, disagree with it, and not comment simply because they make note of the fact that other posters have already made post(s) making essentially the same point(s). That is good, since we discourage "dog piling" on posters.

 

[lklawson]

3 guys on this thread is a great many?

Please don't assume that my experience with the concept of range, ma-ai, or Measure, is restricted to only this thread. I might have a bit more than that to draw upon.

I had already stated It wasn't set in stone. Not sure about your other comment about being a wanker as yours appeared to be Just a scholastic insult.

You were unclear and got grumpy when asked to clarify, stating that you assumed it was "self explanatory." Well, the fact is that it wasn't and part of that reason was because of the brevity and terseness of your initial post on the subject. The fact is that communicating well in writing is hard. Professionals in writing require training and years (decades) of practice. I'm buds with about 4 published authors so I know this. Your reply was "or a dictionary." Yeah, that's being a wang. So take a deep breath and spend a bit of time explaining what you want to communicate instead of writing in short-hand lists and expecting that everyone has the same experience as you do.

I never claimed to be a writer

No one expects you to be. But we do want you to be clear about what you're trying to communicate. When you aren't, you should expect to be told that you weren't.

but as always with the fabulous long timers it's just insults...have a great day.

It's not about insulting you. Take another look around. If you were going to be insulted, it would be much more blunt.

Now, if you'd like to address my statements which you disagree with, and why, this would be a good place to do so.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Kwon Bup]

That's all fine Kirk..if the response is for you. But if it's not leave it be. I know some of you think your responses are well thought out...but they are not. What I see is some of you folks attacking people simply because you disagree with their assessment on training practices. That is what a lot of newbies see.

But no worries...martial talk is way to negative If a group for me. I take my bow and I will depart. Peace and success in your endeavors but this site has nothing of value to offer. Good day.

 

[mograph]

But no worries...martial talk is way to negative If a group for me.

Parting thoughts:

You might want to check out some of the downright abusive, insulting and angry martial arts forums out there. This is just disagreement here.

Yes, writing is difficult, but like many activities, improvement requires a desire to change and a willingness to admit mistakes or sub-par performance.

If one's writing is not clear to an audience, the fault may lie with the writer, not the audience. Why? Because the writer misjudged the audience. The writer should then rephrase.

 

[lklawson]

That's all fine Kirk..if the response is for you.

It's for me now. You already wrote that you disagreed with me. So explain what you disagree with and why. I've already given you the same courtesy, and in some detail.

I know some of you think your responses are well thought out...

Did they tell you that in PM? But who cares. Make your own argument.

but they are not.

Explain it to me.

What I see is some of you folks attacking people simply because you disagree with their assessment on training practices. That is what a lot of newbies see.

I don't really care right now about what "other" people are doing. That's what the Mods are for. I'm asking you, yet again, to explain what it is you disagree with and why. Back up what you're saying.

But no worries...martial talk is way to negative If a group for me.

Good gravy, man! MT is "too negative?!?!?!" What are you used to, bunnies and unicorns?!?

I take my bow and I will depart.

So I take it then, that you're unable to back up your thesis?

Good day.

 

[jks9199]

That's all fine Kirk..if the response is for you. But if it's not leave it be. I know some of you think your responses are well thought out...but they are not. What I see is some of you folks attacking people simply because you disagree with their assessment on training practices. That is what a lot of newbies see.

But no worries...martial talk is way to negative If a group for me. I take my bow and I will depart. Peace and success in your endeavors but this site has nothing of value to offer. Good day.

Posts are public statements; everyone on the board can see them. And respond to them. Kind of like talking in a bar or living room... If you want a private conversation, you go to a private area. Kirk has given polite, well reasoned and detailed responses to your posts. A few others have been less kind... but still fairly polite. Stomping off in a huff isn't making your point at all...

You posted an idea; there's some validity to it, there's a lot wrong with it. "Fights collapse." Ok... it seems that you mean that ranges shrink as a fight develops, right? Not really. First -- fights and violence (yeah, not the same, but I'm going to stay with "fights" from here on for convenience; the other is a big concept.) happen at ranges -- and they usually start a lot closer range than people expect. Whether we're discussing social or asocial acts -- a lot of the pre-fight moves are about shrinking the range to reduce the victim/opponent's time to recognize and react to the attack. From that point, you have choices about maintaining or changing the range. Personally, I like to initially try to get more room to figure out what's up -- then select the range I'm most equipped to deal with the attack within... That could be anything from drawing a firearm to letting the erstwhile assailant run away. So -- I think most of us would agree that you need to teach students to deal with attacks at various ranges -- but that you've also simultaneously oversimplified and overcomplicated it.

 

[DavidThomas]

The more I read, the more convinced I am that you really don't have a clew.

The English word is "clue"

 

[lklawson]

The English word is "clue"

Nope. Again, you speak out of ignorance. That spelling is 100% accurate and correct, though a tad anachronistic. That spelling was particularly common in the late nineteenth and early Twentieth Century. It appears quite often in newspaper reports from that time period. I have found it represented quite frequently in my research from that time.

Here is one of the many examples that I have:

MEANT TO KILL.
Murderous Assault on a Charlestown Man. John Wall Decoyed Into House on Returning from Bank. Was Struck Eight Times With a Slungshot. Police Believe Robbery Was Motive of Crime. No Clew to the Perpetrator of the Dastardly Deed.
Boston Daily Globe - Boston, Mass.
Date: Sep 16, 1893
​

Why do I occasionally use the spelling for that word? For the same reason that I put the horizontal slash through my 7, through my letter Z, and the dividing slash through my 0 when writing by hand or occasionally write "colour" or "favour." Just because it's correct and I feel like it. The fact that it occasionally catches wannabe know-it-all spelling Nazis is just an added bonus.

 

[Tez3]

The English word is "clue"

Actually 'clew' is a more archaic form of 'clue' still valid and used, so he's right and you are wrong.

 

[mograph]

The fact that it occasionally catches wannabe know-it-all spelling Nazis is just an added bonus.

Ooh! Nazi bait!

Advice to wannabe spelling Nazis in this context: evaluate the writing style of the person who may have misspelled the word. If the style leans toward the literate, Google the word before calling out the poster.