Why do Westerners train in exotic unrealistic weapons and ignore practical ones like baseball bats?

[jobo]

In what context are you asking? You replied to several points with that and it illudes me exactly what you mean. in terms of what i wrote about kenjutsu, that was a example of how you could home study decently with access to a training partner and media on the subeject for how to cut etc.

Just to re iterate, this is me stating you can get a acceptable standard via it.

The bicep curl i learnt on my own only using diagrams and videos. The point of me stating that is, do i need to have gone and paid for a personal trainer to learn that? or can we agree some things you can pick up by yourself, or at least some people can.

I cant tell you how many pe people I've witnessed doing bicep curls incorrectly, hundreds, many hundreds, that's why god invented steroids, so no seems to be the answer, people cant general teach themselves to curl

 

[skribs]

In what context are you asking? You replied to several points with that and it illudes me exactly what you mean. in terms of what i wrote about kenjutsu, that was a example of how you could home study decently with access to a training partner and media on the subeject for how to cut etc.

Just to re iterate, this is me stating you can get a acceptable standard via it.

The bicep curl i learnt on my own only using diagrams and videos. The point of me stating that is, do i need to have gone and paid for a personal trainer to learn that? or can we agree some things you can pick up by yourself, or at least some people can.

When you train martial arts, is it by yourself, or do you have an instructor?

Bicep curls are a relatively simple thing to learn compared to martial arts. There is a lot more nuance that goes into how to punch a bag correctly than how to do a bicep curl correctly. There is even more that goes into how to apply it to an actual person. And even with the bicep curl, there are a lot of factors that it would be beneficial to have a trainer check your form and your program.

If you're training on your own, without an instructor, I don't see how you could ever get past a superficial understanding of the techniques and concepts.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

When you train martial arts, is it by yourself, or do you have an instructor?

Mixed. I do stuff at home, and sometimes its not covered by anywhere in my town. ie weapons. But as i stated i have been getting back into it. So for the weapon things i literally cannot, but i usually look for a video/diagram for how to do things and work off that. I havent forgotten how to punch since when i used to go. (never stated it was good, just i havent forgotten)

Bicep curls are a relatively simple thing to learn compared to martial arts. There is a lot more nuance that goes into how to punch a bag correctly than how to do a bicep curl correctly. There is even more that goes into how to apply it to an actual person. And even with the bicep curl, there are a lot of factors that it would be beneficial to have a trainer check your form and your program.

i would state it more matters on what you are specfically doing than if its martial arts or not. Some things you will be able to pick up fine, others not so much. Basic concepts i belive should be fine if you have suffcient ifnormation on ahnd describing and illistrating what to do. Like when i was taught to punch it was "form a fist, your good"*. and thats also why you spar, if you can so-so pull off soemthing against a resisting person, you probbly understand how to pull it off suffciently to use it.

I think its kind of like using a firearm, if you have literally no idea what you are doing or cant grasp a concept, you need somone to run through the basics with you, if you have seene nough information on it, you could probbly figure it out suffciently. So in general, if you get stuck and there is soemthing everyone cant cant grasp at some point, you will seek out a class, at home training isnt the end all be all, nor do i think you will get advanced concepts down, but it will at least be a stop gap for the basics nd if you ever go to a class they run through the basics with everyone who starts usually.


*I dont literally mean thats the only thing i got told, i was jsut poining out i knew how to form a fist so it wasnt a point i needed correcting on, they explained the whole hip drive, keep arms striagh when punching aim with first two knuckles etc. And for the record, i didnt know any of that before i started, i think i tried a systema punch first time i went. I only knew how to form a fist.

If you're training on your own, without an instructor, I don't see how you could ever get past a superficial understanding of the techniques and concepts.

I dont think you really need to for the scope i am presenting.



Was slightly rushed in this reply, if i left anything out let me know. Also, yes i can only comprehend firearm anaologies.

 

[drop bear]

I cant tell you how many pe people I've witnessed doing bicep curls incorrectly, hundreds, many hundreds, that's why god invented steroids, so no seems to be the answer, people cant general teach themselves to curl

Yeah. But that is the other side of the argument. You can very easily get hands on weapon training and get training that is a load of rubbish.

You are not going to find many practical knife or gun fighters. You will predominantly be learning from second hand sources. Who's first hand source isn't that great. Your first hand source might have shot or stabbed one guy.

And your experts tend to be weird anyway because they come from these military and police super authoritarian backgrounds so they just don't get called on their crap.

I have never met a weapons guy with the sort of insight say Danaher has.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

How about this:

Bicep curls are reasonably simple and yeah, you can probably learn one from an illustration. But, that doesn't make you an athlete or a body builder and you probably shouldn't assert your expertise over a bunch of certified trainers.

Also, ever wonder why professional athletes still have trainers? Couldn't they also just learn on-their-own?

If you want to learn on-line go ahead, but please stop telling us how things are. You're not going to convince any of us and someone who may not know any better might mistake your confidence for expertise.

Interestingly, I've seen a number of people doing bicep curls wrong. They thought they were doing them right, but were making mistakes. Some of those mistakes were small and unimportant at the level of their training - more about efficiency of results than anything else. Others were putting joints at risk, while still others were effectively changing the exercise so it didn't do what they wanted it to do.

All of these examples were being corrected by personal trainers or experienced bodybuilders in their first session. They probably also had many folks who did, in fact, do the bicep curl correctly before that first session. Those folks also thought they were doing it right.

 

[jobo]

Mixed. I do stuff at home, and sometimes its not covered by anywhere in my town. ie weapons. But as i stated i have been getting back into it. So for the weapon things i literally cannot, but i usually look for a video/diagram for how to do things and work off that. I havent forgotten how to punch since when i used to go. (never stated it was good, just i havent forgotten)



i would state it more matters on what you are specfically doing than if its martial arts or not. Some things you will be able to pick up fine, others not so much. Basic concepts i belive should be fine if you have suffcient ifnormation on ahnd describing and illistrating what to do. Like when i was taught to punch it was "form a fist, your good"*. and thats also why you spar, if you can so-so pull off soemthing against a resisting person, you probbly understand how to pull it off suffciently to use it.

I think its kind of like using a firearm, if you have literally no idea what you are doing or cant grasp a concept, you need somone to run through the basics with you, if you have seene nough information on it, you could probbly figure it out suffciently. So in general, if you get stuck and there is soemthing everyone cant cant grasp at some point, you will seek out a class, at home training isnt the end all be all, nor do i think you will get advanced concepts down, but it will at least be a stop gap for the basics nd if you ever go to a class they run through the basics with everyone who starts usually.


*I dont literally mean thats the only thing i got told, i was jsut poining out i knew how to form a fist so it wasnt a point i needed correcting on, they explained the whole hip drive, keep arms striagh when punching aim with first two knuckles etc. And for the record, i didnt know any of that before i started, i think i tried a systema punch first time i went. I only knew how to form a fist.



I dont think you really need to for the scope i am presenting.



Was slightly rushed in this reply, if i left anything out let me know. Also, yes i can only comprehend firearm anaologies.

this is just you '' logic'' cirle to support your decision not to pay for training

you may have been shown how to punch, you may just have actually managed to pick up the mechanics, but if you were to go in a ring with someone of similar physical attributes, who has undertake even three months of boxing training, you
a) wont be able to hit him
and
b) will get hit very hard in return

your basic mechanics are of no use if you can't hit a fast moving target and get your nose broken whilst you missing

from self defence point of view you hoping that whoever attacks you is less skilled than you are and as most people who attack others can throw a punch that's quite optimistic

 

[Deleted member 39746]

this is just you '' logic'' cirle to support your decision not to pay for training

you may have been shown how to punch, you may just have actually managed to pick up the mechanics, but if you were to go in a ring with someone of similar physical attributes, who has undertake even three months of boxing training, you
a) wont be able to hit him
and
b) will get hit very hard in return

your basic mechanics are of no use if you can't hit a fast moving target and get your nose broken whilst you missing

from self defence point of view you hoping that whoever attacks you is less skilled than you are and as most people who attack others can throw a punch that's quite optimistic

I did set the criteria to be "the common criminal". The ring is irrelivent. I wouldnt step foot in it, unless i needed money and got paid irrelivent if i won a match or not. Or without doing a training programe before it, as its just silly as every other person in those competitions would do that. Also i did say about the what if's, you can what if anything in place to make the odd's worse and worse, and like i said, 8 people armed with automatic weapons and armour. it doesnt really acomplish that much to a argument, hence why i set the criteria to be self defence against the common criminal. And more specfically WITH WEAPONS. YOU will be armed.


But replying breifly to the points made here: I dont see how sparring differs that much from at a designated place to at home, nothing preludes sparring at one location to be better or worse than the other based on location. The facts are, you are trying to hit somone who is trying to hit you in return, if you do that, its valid. Just because they dont, or you dont fight like a boxer, MMA'ist, Judoka etc doesnt seem valid, and i would argue it could have some beenfit as unless said person has trained in them, they wont fight like them. All those habits etc untrained people do, you will be getting used to.

Just quickly on the last point, on a self defence view i would be hoping no one throws a punch at me. thats the entire point of self defence.



And now i wish to return to the orginal argument about weapons, as disucssing my own habits, and unarmed fighting doesnt seem fully relivent for a thread predominately about weapons. At least by itself and not if you get into grappling etc with one. The dymanics of unarmed and armed fighting are certainly diffrent.

if anyone wishes to semi rekindle the trainign time for weapons argument, quote this sentence.

 

[jobo]

I did set the criteria to be "the common criminal". The ring is irrelivent. I wouldnt step foot in it, unless i needed money and got paid irrelivent if i won a match or not. Or without doing a training programe before it, as its just silly as every other person in those competitions would do that. Also i did say about the what if's, you can what if anything in place to make the odd's worse and worse, and like i said, 8 people armed with automatic weapons and armour. it doesnt really acomplish that much to a argument, hence why i set the criteria to be self defence against the common criminal. And more specfically WITH WEAPONS. YOU will be armed.


But replying breifly to the points made here: I dont see how sparring differs that much from at a designated place to at home, nothing preludes sparring at one location to be better or worse than the other based on location. The facts are, you are trying to hit somone who is trying to hit you in return, if you do that, its valid. Just because they dont, or you dont fight like a boxer, MMA'ist, Judoka etc doesnt seem valid, and i would argue it could have some beenfit as unless said person has trained in them, they wont fight like them. All those habits etc untrained people do, you will be getting used to.

Just quickly on the last point, on a self defence view i would be hoping no one throws a punch at me. thats the entire point of self defence.



And now i wish to return to the orginal argument about weapons, as disucssing my own habits, and unarmed fighting doesnt seem fully relivent for a thread predominately about weapons. At least by itself and not if you get into grappling etc with one. The dymanics of unarmed and armed fighting are certainly diffrent.

if anyone wishes to semi rekindle the trainign time for weapons argument, quote this sentence.

because competition against a competent opponent is the only way of testing your skills, infact its the only way to develop them

and the common criminal round here, is generally in quite good shape and in possession of basic fighting skills, like punching and avoiding getting punched, being fit and able to defend yourself is a bit of a prerequisite to be a common criminal, how long do you think drug dealers with no fighting skills last ? burglars that cant climb a drain pipe and out run the police? or muggers that get beaten up every time they say give me your wallet to anybody over 12

i suppose if you wanted to stretch the definition, as you generally want to do, then you could find a 60 yo shop lifter with arthritis, call her a common criminal and fight them, you might win that!

 

[ShortBridge]

I have a student who learned on-line and had/has a group of guys who he trained and sparred with weekly for a couple of years. Tough guy, a black eye means nothing to him and he is much younger and stronger than me.

When he started with me, it was kind of like trying to speak Spanish to someone who had been looking up words on Google translate, but didn't understand the language and had never met any Spanish speaking people. He made gestures that I recognized, but clearly didn't understand them and could not have used them to accomplish anything.

I asked him to stay off-line and pause his garage sparring for a bit. He's a great student and trained very hard and respectfully. His friends don't like to play with him anymore. He still spars with them occasionally, but he says that it's not really fun anymore because it's too easy and they've started putting restrictions on what he is allowed to do. I am working on arraging some training for him and a similar student with better trained opponents not of our style.

You're kidding yourself Rat. It would not take much for me or most of the people you are arguing with of that if you weren't just some anonymous kid on the internet. I would love a chance to help you develop into what you think you are, but I won't have that chance unless it turns out that you're from Seattle and can get over yourself, neither of which seem likely.

Wherever you live, there is someone in your town who would change your life for the better and I hope you put your hubris behind you someday and seek them out.

But, honestly I need to look away from your misguided drivel because my neck hurts from shaking my head so much.

 

[skribs]

Mixed. I do stuff at home, and sometimes its not covered by anywhere in my town. ie weapons. But as i stated i have been getting back into it. So for the weapon things i literally cannot, but i usually look for a video/diagram for how to do things and work off that. I havent forgotten how to punch since when i used to go. (never stated it was good, just i havent forgotten)



i would state it more matters on what you are specfically doing than if its martial arts or not. Some things you will be able to pick up fine, others not so much. Basic concepts i belive should be fine if you have suffcient ifnormation on ahnd describing and illistrating what to do. Like when i was taught to punch it was "form a fist, your good"*. and thats also why you spar, if you can so-so pull off soemthing against a resisting person, you probbly understand how to pull it off suffciently to use it.

I think its kind of like using a firearm, if you have literally no idea what you are doing or cant grasp a concept, you need somone to run through the basics with you, if you have seene nough information on it, you could probbly figure it out suffciently. So in general, if you get stuck and there is soemthing everyone cant cant grasp at some point, you will seek out a class, at home training isnt the end all be all, nor do i think you will get advanced concepts down, but it will at least be a stop gap for the basics nd if you ever go to a class they run through the basics with everyone who starts usually.


*I dont literally mean thats the only thing i got told, i was jsut poining out i knew how to form a fist so it wasnt a point i needed correcting on, they explained the whole hip drive, keep arms striagh when punching aim with first two knuckles etc. And for the record, i didnt know any of that before i started, i think i tried a systema punch first time i went. I only knew how to form a fist.



I dont think you really need to for the scope i am presenting.



Was slightly rushed in this reply, if i left anything out let me know. Also, yes i can only comprehend firearm anaologies.

The problem is that without experience, you don't know what details you're missing about the technique, or what concepts you're missing.

People come to my classes all the time, with all sorts of book knowledge, logic, and home practice like you have. But their footwork is terrible, their timing is nonexistent, and they have no real sense of how to apply all of this knowledge. But that's okay, because they are humble about it and there to learn.

I like how you give the example of how to punch, because your very first post on this site was an article about punches with so much misinformation in it. So obviously you can't learn to punch just from your method.

What do you mean when you say you're getting back into it? Because last I heard you hadn't.

I'm also curious your extent of firearms training. If I remember correctly, you're in a country where firearms are heavily restricted. Have you done competitions in things like 3 gun or IDPA to test how well you'd function with a firearm in a live situation?

I did an IDPA tournament once, and let me tell you: my internet research and solo range time did not prepare me to be competitive in that tournament.

 

[Flying Crane]

As much as I agree with the folks here who point out the shortcomings of @Rat ‘s general approach of not getting instruction, I think that in this case he does have a valid point, which I tried to highlight in an earlier post. That point is, many of the traditional weapons found in the martial arts, things like staff, stick, spear, sword, sai, are somewhat intuitive in how they are used. On a very basic level it just isn’t rocket science. You don’t need training nor good technique to understand that if you need to use the weapon against someone, you stab him with the pointy end, you cut him with the sharp edge, you bludgeon him with the blunt part, and any of a number of rudimentary thrusting or swinging motions can accomplish these things. This can be effective against a variety of enemies, whether zombie or living. You don’t need to be highly trained, or even trained on any level, in order to be a danger to your enemy if you pick up one of these weapons. And I hold that this is true for improvised weapons such as baseball bats and crowbars as well.

Is that something that we can acknowledge and accept?

There is a whole host of issues beyond this that we can also acknowledge. Without training, the full range of capabilities with each weapon will not be understood. Technique will be sloppy and inefficient. Bad habits that can lead to injury to oneself can be prevalent. While being dangerous to one’s enemy, one can also be dangerous to one’s companions when technique is sloppy and careless. There will be a lack of a systematic training methodology that will hinder or even halt any real advancement in skill.

These are the things that good instruction should overcome. Can we all acknowledge and agree with this?

We can all understand that a fellow can be an effective fighter (empty-hand) without any training. Some people just have a knack for it, they are tough fellows and they carry it out with aggression and athleticism, or just simple meanness. We would never say that they could never fight unless they had instruction first, even if we might say that getting instruction could make them much better at it. In fact, many many discussions here in the forums include the hypothetical “street fighter” who is a thug with a lot of experience, but without any training, and how this hypothetical person could have the advantage over many trained martial artists who lack that practical experience. We see that scenario put forth over and over in discussions here, so the notion is not foreign to us. I see this weapon discussion as being parallel and comparable.

Can we agree with that as well?

And lastly I will say that this holds true for firearms as well. I grew up around guns, did a modest amount of hunting, have shot a variety of long guns and a smaller variety of handguns. This was simple target shooting, nothing that was combat training or the such. I’ve barely touched a firearm in a couple decades, and have not fired one in probably 25-30 years. So I have a basic understanding, but definitely NOT highly trained.

If I had access to a firearm, and needed to defend my life, I absolutely hold that I could do it. A higher level of training could make me better at it. But nevertheless, I hold that the experience that I do have with it is enough for me to be effective. Some of this is pretty intuitive. I don’t need to imagine the absolute worst case scenario to justify what I might need to do. That worst case scenario is highly unlikely. Without having trained and prepared for that worst case scenario, I can still defend myself. Without having spent hours and hours training with a particular firearm, I could still make effective use of it, If I needed to.

 

[ShortBridge]

I can certainly agree that untrained people who pick up weapons can be dangerous bwith them. I know for a fact that not all good fighters were formally trained to be and not every with martial arts training is a good, or even competent fighter. No arguments from me on those points now or ever before.

That's got nothing to do with the non-stop steam of ill-informed Rat-drivel that is plastered in virtually every thread on any subject posted on MT, though.

 

[Flying Crane]

I can certainly agree that untrained people who pick up weapons can be dangerous bwith them. I know for a fact that not all good fighters were formally trained to be and not every with martial arts training is a good, or even competent fighter. No arguments from me on those points now or ever before.

That's got nothing to do with the non-stop steam of ill-informed Rat-drivel that is plastered in virtually every thread on any subject posted on MT, though.

I agree, but I think in this particular case he has a point, to which the response has been essentially “it cannot be done without good instruction first”.

I think that response is inaccurate.

 

[jobo]

As much as I agree with the folks here who point out the shortcomings of @Rat ‘s general approach of not getting instruction, I think that in this case he does have a valid point, which I tried to highlight in an earlier post. That point is, many of the traditional weapons found in the martial arts, things like staff, stick, spear, sword, sai, are somewhat intuitive in how they are used. On a very basic level it just isn’t rocket science. You don’t need training nor good technique to understand that if you need to use the weapon against someone, you stab him with the pointy end, you cut him with the sharp edge, you bludgeon him with the blunt part, and any of a number of rudimentary thrusting or swinging motions can accomplish these things. This can be effective against a variety of enemies, whether zombie or living. You don’t need to be highly trained, or even trained on any level, in order to be a danger to your enemy if you pick up one of these weapons. And I hold that this is true for improvised weapons such as baseball bats and crowbars as well.

Is that something that we can acknowledge and accept?

There is a whole host of issues beyond this that we can also acknowledge. Without training, the full range of capabilities with each weapon will not be understood. Technique will be sloppy and inefficient. Bad habits that can lead to injury to oneself can be prevalent. While being dangerous to one’s enemy, one can also be dangerous to one’s companions when technique is sloppy and careless. There will be a lack of a systematic training methodology that will hinder or even halt any real advancement in skill.

These are the things that good instruction should overcome. Can we all acknowledge and agree with this?

We can all understand that a fellow can be an effective fighter (empty-hand) without any training. Some people just have a knack for it, they are tough fellows and they carry it out with aggression and athleticism, or just simple meanness. We would never say that they could never fight unless they had instruction first, even if we might say that getting instruction could make them much better at it. In fact, many many discussions here in the forums include the hypothetical “street fighter” who is a thug with a lot of experience, but without any training, and how this hypothetical person could have the advantage over many trained martial artists who lack that practical experience. We see that scenario put forth over and over in discussions here, so the notion is not foreign to us. I see this weapon discussion as being parallel and comparable.

Can we agree with that as well?

And lastly I will say that this holds true for firearms as well. I grew up around guns, did a modest amount of hunting, have shot a variety of long guns and a smaller variety of handguns. This was simple target shooting, nothing that was combat training or the such. I’ve barely touched a firearm in a couple decades, and have not fired one in probably 25-30 years. So I have a basic understanding, but definitely NOT highly trained.

If I had access to a firearm, and needed to defend my life, I absolutely hold that I could do it. A higher level of training could make me better at it. But nevertheless, I hold that the experience that I do have with it is enough for me to be effective. Some of this is pretty intuitive. I don’t need to imagine the absolute worst case scenario to justify what I might need to do. That worst case scenario is highly unlikely. Without having trained and prepared for that worst case scenario, I can still defend myself. Without having spent hours and hours training with a particular firearm, I could still make effective use of it, If I needed to.

thers a lot there so lets just pick a representave point,

the intuativness of weasons

so hitting a fast moving base ball with a bat is a simple intuitive thing. yet most people picking up a bat for the first time will not hit it cleanly or more like at all. maybe a glancing blow one in ten

if the same person picks up a bat for the similar intuitive action of hitting someone with it. if that person is taking evasive action. why do you think there success rate will be considerably higher ?

 

[ShortBridge]

Could someone fight off a burgular in your house with a baseball bat without training? Um...it probably depends on the burgular, but sure I guess. And TKD, Wing Chun, or BJJ will not make you better at that specifically.

Sure, Rat is right, I've been schooled. In truth, this thread started out citing zombie movies as evidence of something so the whole thing was beyond absurd to begin with.

I stand behind every single thing that I wrote in this thread though. We were never on-topic to zombie fighting and ... Why do any of us even try?

 

[Buka]

But replying breifly to the points made here: I dont see how sparring differs that much from at a designated place to at home, nothing preludes sparring at one location to be better or worse than the other based on location.

Actually, bro, it does matter.

It's kind of like saying all food is the same regardless of what restaurant or home you eat it in.

 

[drop bear]

The problem is that without experience, you don't know what details you're missing about the technique, or what concepts you're missing.

People come to my classes all the time, with all sorts of book knowledge, logic, and home practice like you have. But their footwork is terrible, their timing is nonexistent, and they have no real sense of how to apply all of this knowledge. But that's okay, because they are humble about it and there to learn.

I like how you give the example of how to punch, because your very first post on this site was an article about punches with so much misinformation in it. So obviously you can't learn to punch just from your method.

What do you mean when you say you're getting back into it? Because last I heard you hadn't.

I'm also curious your extent of firearms training. If I remember correctly, you're in a country where firearms are heavily restricted. Have you done competitions in things like 3 gun or IDPA to test how well you'd function with a firearm in a live situation?

I did an IDPA tournament once, and let me tell you: my internet research and solo range time did not prepare me to be competitive in that tournament.

Fine. But does IDPA prepare you for a home invasion?

 

[drop bear]

Actually, bro, it does matter.

It's kind of like saying all food is the same regardless of what restaurant or home you eat it in.

Or so long as you are having fun the style doesn't matter.

 

[jobo]

Fine. But does IDPA prepare you for a home invasion?

nothing but being ready and waiting with a pump again shot gun prepares you for a home invasion

 

[ShortBridge]

...
so hitting a fast moving base ball with a bat is a simple intuitive thing. yet most people picking up a bat for the first time will not hit it cleanly or more like at all. maybe a glancing blow one in ten

...

I'm really glad you brought this up. I played baseball through high school and even briefly at a lower tiered college. I am currently on our local Little League board and have coached kids at every age from TBall to entering High School. It is VERY difficult to hit a baseball. Pro's do it successfully 1/3 of the time...that's trips to the plate during which they get 3 chances, so let's just say it takes an average of 2 pitches for them to hit successfully 1/3 of the time. That means GREAT players with 10,000 hours of instruction, practice, and training are able to hit a pitched ball successfully about 1.5 - 2 times out of 10. No amount of watching baseball on TV or studying it on YouTube would enable you to hit off an average pitcher.

No one thinks that watching every game that Steph Curry plays in, following his diet plan, and practicing in your driveway means that you could walk into a good inner-city pickup game and play like Steph Curry or even make a basket.

Why is it so easy to think that martial arts is different?