Winning - Important or Irrelevant?

[Sukerkin]

I don't doubt it at all :nods:.

What I was trying to show, in the phrase that you quoted, was what the appearance was that was being received, at least by this member of the readership - I can see tho' that it does not read that way in isolation and I apologise that it came across so ill.

 

[chinto]

NOBODY I know trains to fight to the death, although, I suspect most people can do so, if forced into such a situation, without any other choice - whether they train in M/A or not.

I guess that depends on the person. I do NOT train for tournament type fighting. I train to be able to defend myself and my loved ones. This could mean a fight to the DEATH , or just enough force to stop the person from continuing. ( that would depend on the attacker and other variables.) but the fight could very very easily be lethal. UNTRAINED DRUNKS KILL EACH OTHER IN BAR FIGHTS BY ACCIDENT!!! there is a very old saying, and it defiantly applies to the streets, " If you FIGHT you may DIE!"

So I would submit that a lot of the older styles do train with an eye to a fight to the death. the kata teaches techniques for that. of course it is the practitioner who will decide if it is a situation that requires that level of force.

 

[Champ-Pain]

I guess that depends on the person. I do NOT train for tournament type fighting. I train to be able to defend myself and my loved ones. This could mean a fight to the DEATH , or just enough force to stop the person from continuing. ( that would depend on the attacker and other variables.) but the fight could very very easily be lethal. UNTRAINED DRUNKS KILL EACH OTHER IN BAR FIGHTS BY ACCIDENT!!! there is a very old saying, and it defiantly applies to the streets, " If you FIGHT you may DIE!"

So I would submit that a lot of the older styles do train with an eye to a fight to the death. the kata teaches techniques for that. of course it is the practitioner who will decide if it is a situation that requires that level of force.

My point is that you don't have to train to kill, in order to do so. Anybody can kill, if the situation requires it. I don't train to kill, I train to kick ***. The thing is that - the *** kicking can very easily turn deadly... for either combatent.

 

[Cyriacus]

My point is that you don't have to train to kill, in order to do so. Anybody can kill, if the situation requires it. I don't train to kill, I train to kick ***. The thing is that - the *** kicking can very easily turn deadly... for either combatent.

Do you Practice Throat Pinches, Eye Gouges, or Neck Breaks, for Example?

Its two different Schools of thought.
Its like how Wrestlers think they can Punch, and Strikers think they can Wrestle; Assuming theyre just Brawler Types. Or Training a Form that Exclusively covers One.

Yes, the Wrestlers can Punch. Yes, the Strikers can Wrestle.
But the Strikers are BETTER at Striking, and the Wrestlers are BETTER at Wrestling.
As such, Training to Kill makes you better at delivering that kind of Force.
Training to "Kick ***" may well make you Good at Kicking ***. But attempting to make the Outcome more Lethal, it would be sloppy, and probably rather sluggish.
Similarly, Training to Kill can make doing less effectual stuff look strange. I know someone where I am now, who did some Tai Chi once. The whole Relaxing, Fancy Tai Chi anyone can do. He had Powerful Movements. In Slow, Relaxed Tai Chi. Because thats what He had learnt to do with those types of movements. Generate Power. Even moving Slowly, Relaxedly, and Calmly.
Its all effectual.
Itd be like telling a Boxer to Choke someone out. He could do it. But it wouldnt be the neat 5-10 Second Chokes-To-Unconsciousness were used to.

Besides - If "Anybody can Kill", then "Anybody can Fight". So why Practice it, if it wont make you *Better* at it?

If you can see what Im Presenting here.

 

[Chris Parker]

My point is that you don't have to train to kill, in order to do so. Anybody can kill, if the situation requires it. I don't train to kill, I train to kick ***. The thing is that - the *** kicking can very easily turn deadly... for either combatent.

I'll see if I can explain it to you, then.

Training in lethal methodology is one thing, but the emphasis is on the mindset created by such training. Without training to kill, having the intent and resolve behind such actions, on both the Uchidachi's and Shidachi's side, it is what some refer to as "martial calisthenics", and has no real value whatsoever. Let's face it, I'm hardly about to need sword skills against a sword wielding attacker in the street, am I? So the training is about something else, yeah? And no matter how much you train in a sport, no matter how intense you think it is, it really is completely different to the mentality of a martial art concerned with life and death encounters and combat. When I'm in my more elitist mindset, I'd say that what you do isn't a martial art, it's a martial sport, and a limited one at that. You really can't give kids actual martial arts the way I do them, and that's one reason I don't teach kids. As a result, your potshot about "how many of those students would do better under you than under me - rhetorical.. I know the answer, few to none" (from your "edited" post) is completely irrelevant, Angel. Under me, they'd learn a martial art. Under you, they'd get trophies and trinkets. They're not the same thing.

But to the crux of the matter, you started this thread, yeah. But then you've complained that you were misinterpreted and misunderstood throughout the entire thing whenever someone gave an opinion outside of your realm of sporting contest. Deal with it, that's the viewpoint people are coming in with, if you don't like a conversation being open to all, don't start one. You haven't been misunderstood, it's just that people have been coming at the conversation from other places and understandings than yours. Seriously, deal with it. Kay?

NOTE: I am not saying here, before anyone gets upset, that Judo isn't good, great, or even saying it isn't a martial art, other than in the strict combative versus sporting sense here. Personally, I love Judo, but it's very different from the type of thing that I'm talking about, and even further when it's basically just kids, as in Angel's school.

 

[Champ-Pain]

I completely understand where you guys are coming from. I just don't agree. I'll start with the sword, mentioned above. Who in God's earth carries a sword around with them, for self defense, or any other reason? Out of those who do, how many bring it with you when you get out of your vehicle? Example: movie, theatre, super market, school, etc.? I'm prepared to say - nobody. Which brings me to my next point. How can you use it to kill, if it's not in your posession, at a time of need? I will still have my Judo and other *** kicking abilities with me, at all times. And besides, if I wanted to kill - I'd use a weapon which I can easily hide on my person. Like a handgun. I just want to defend myself, not kill. But if I did want to kill, I most certainly could do so, in a heartbeat. As far as throat pinch, eye gouch and neck breaks, do I personally practice it? No. But if I'm in a life or death situation and my life depended on it, I'd bite, scratch, poke, pinch, gouch, pull hair, whatever it took, to make it out alive. I'd also use weapons not practiced in the dojo. Example: bottle, rock, chair, trash can, solid lump of oak, anything I can get my hands on.

My point is that just because someone doesn't train to kill - doesn't mean they can't do so, if they actually had to. And just because you do train to kill - doesn't mean you will be able to do so in the way or manner in which you practice to do so, if your sword is not around for you to use.

PS - I teach kids, but I train with adults, whenever I train, at all. I'm also a very good shot with most any fire arms. So you see, I don't train to kill - but I can do so, in more ways than one.

 

[Chris Parker]

Angel, seriously, read the damn responses, okay? It's about the mindset and personal development that such training brings up, nothing whatsoever to do with using a sword to kill someone in real life. It's not about actually killing people, it's about the emphasis in the training.

Seriously, look past your own limited approach and listen to what you're being told. This is the very crux of why winning is irrelevant to persons such as myself. You really need to recognise that there are other reasons to train in these arts, and other arts that are far better suited to these other reasons. Ideally, you'd listen to us saying that, and learn, rather than just come back with "but it's not practical".

Do you get it yet?

 

[Champ-Pain]

Chris: Like I said, I completely understand your point, I just don't agree. My limited approach and common sense tells me that it's not practical. But if you put it that way - I suppose I do train to kill, as well, same as you - but differently. I got it, I guess...

 

[Chris Parker]

Sigh... No, Angel, you don't get it. At all. The big indication is you're talking about whether or not it's "practical". Still. After I just pointed out that that's really not anything to do with it.

And no, you don't train the same as me. Trust me on that one. Nor do you train to kill. Otherwise there'd be some rather dead bodies at the tournaments. What you train in can be used as such, but that's incredibly different to what I'm talking about here. But I feel you'd need to experience it in order to understand.

 

[Champ-Pain]

A tournament is one thing, a street fight is something completely different. Did you ever compete? Did you ever kill someone in competition? You do realize that you can do both, train to compete and to kill. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

 

[Chris Parker]

And again, you demonstrate that you don't get what I'm talking about. At all.

Yes, Angel, I did compete, both in TKD and Karate, as well as doing some time in a BJJ school, and some boxing. And trust me, you are not getting what I'm saying. I'm talking about the overall aims of the martial art training experience, based on the particulars of the art itself, the mentality and mindset of it's teachings, and the training methods employed. What you do is nothing like what I do. And it really has little to do with practical usage, particularly when dealing with things like armed combat (swords, staffs, spears etc)... but, for the record, my unarmed has the same mindset.

 

[Champ-Pain]

I don't train in or use swords, spears, staffs, etc. - I carry a 9 mm Sig with a full clip, at all times... and for the record, my unarmed skills are just as deadly as anyone elses, even if I do have a different mindset than yours.

 

[Chris Parker]

Okay, one more time, Angel.

This is not about skill sets, it's about the mindset that the training instills.

Forget about what is done for practical reasons, that's irrelevant.

Forget about if you're more deadly, or I am, that's irrelevant.

Forget about the mechanics of the art, that's irrelevant.

It's about the reasons to train, and the benefits that they give. For you, there's competition, and winning. For me, it's the personal growth through the form of training that my arts provide, a great part of it is based in the "aim to kill" training methodology. As a result, winning is completely irrelevant to me, and others training like me. Which is the question that this thread is about (you may have wanted it to only refer to sporting endeavours, but face it, that would be a one sided, boring discussion - "Hey, when you compete, do you want to win?" "Yeah, I do." "Hey, me too").

Please tell me you get it now, and can stop the useless posturing with a gun, and 'deadly judo unarmed skills', yeah? It doesn't do you any favours at all, and actually completely weakens your position.

 

[Champ-Pain]

Please tell me you get it now, and can stop the useless posturing with a gun, and 'deadly judo unarmed skills', yeah? It doesn't do you any favours at all, and actually completely weakens your position.

I not only get it, I was ready to agree and accept your position 100%... but if you'd like me to stop the useless posturing with a gun - I suggest you do the same with the swords, spears and staffs that you won't be carrying with you, when you actually need them... it completely weakens your position, as well.

 

[Chris Parker]

You know, you almost had me there, Angel, thinking you did get what I was saying, until you put in that bit about "when you actually need them". There is no posturing from me, there is no "when you need them", as that is not part of the idea at all. I think I've said that about, what, six or seven times now? And what I mean by your posturing weakening your position is that, when confronted by something outside of your sphere of experience (someone who doesn't necessarily train in order to use the physical skills, but for other reasons), you go immediately to "it's not practical... you won't have them when you need them... but I am deadly unarmed.... and I carry a gun with me, locked and loaded...."

Pointless, Angel, utterly pointless.

What that shows is a lack of belief and internal confidence, which shows a gap in your approach, as it's based on ego and defeating others, which is where your emphasis on winning falls down and fails you as a personal development method. You don't get better as a person, you just get more trophies and trinkets, and you can't lead your kids to anything meaningful other than more trinkets for them. If that's all you're interested in, and all they're interested in, fine. I demand more out of my life experience, though.

 

[Champ-Pain]

So, carrying a sword, spear or staff, instead of a gun - will give me internal confidense? Fill the gap in my approach? Pick me up when I fail and fall? Make my life more meaningful?

Seriously Chris - I get, I really do.

 

[Chris Parker]

For crying out loud, Angel, no, we are NOT talking about carrying weapons around, only you are talking about that. I am talking about an approach to training in a martial art, and you continue to not understand. Try reading it all again, and see if that helps. Because you don't get it. You really don't.

 

[Jenna]

Dear Angel and Christopher,

I worry that you are both obstinately trying to WIN this discussion.

It is ok to disagree, that is fine, yes? Discussions cannot be WON only shared and sometimes the opposing views just can neither be given to nor accepted by one another. That is ok. Perhaps this is one of those times where it might help alleviate tension by taking a breath, and gaining perspective. This is just an internet discussion and not a matter of either personal honour or integrity or life and death!
Otherwise, I worry over where this competition of words will lead. Can I ask, are either of you benefitting from hearing the points of view of the other? If not then are you both only continuing in order to WIN the conversation? I hope not.

Seconds out...

 

[Chris Parker]

My dear, I'm not trying to "win", I can see Angel's side fine, I'm just trying to ensure he actually gets the answer he asked for in the first place ("Is winning important or irrelevant, and please explain why"). If I don't get him to understand, then I don't consider that an adequate explanation.

 

[Champ-Pain]

I agree! He's not listening to me and won't give an inch... NOT one positive reply to any of my posts, NOT one. Therefor - I'm not listening to him, either. We disagree - PERIOD. I'm moving on.

Thanks J, for your wake-up call.