THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Fun Stuff => CHATTER => Topic started by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Jun 2013, 10:17

Title: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Jun 2013, 10:17
This was sparked by a tangent in the WCDT, in which people were discussing the authenticity of various martial arts.

I was at a self-defense class where someone asked the instructors about the value of learning martial arts for protection against violent crime. The answer, not quite verbatim but as close as I remember, was "They're wonderful! It's great exercise and helps you develop self-discipline.". So I guess this is a sports thread and not a self-defense thread.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Carl-E on 04 Jun 2013, 16:33
I often forget that I have mild dyslexia. 


Until I read "Marital arts". 




Just celebrated our 27th anniversary last week.  We congratulated each other over dinner - that was pretty much it.  I think we've pretty much perfected the marital arts!

Film at 11. 
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Jun 2013, 17:29
Congratulations!
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Jace on 04 Jun 2013, 17:47
I did Southern Style Hung Gar Kung Fu for a couple years (lived with my instructor too, we were friends before I started, and we both needed a place to stay so we split an apartment), if you just learn the forms in most martial arts, you'll have a hard time applying them to self defense, but (and this is what I liked about the style I learned) every single move in the form was a block, or strike, and most of them lead into a takedown if it wasn't a takedown on its own. This of course meant that as long as you remembered the forms, you could probably apply it to self defense. There was also a section of each class that we would use to learn the application of the moves as self defense though.

Apparently, even though I haven't done it for a few years, some of the stuff still stuck with me. And when I move around and fight heavy in the SCA, my friends have noted that each time I take a step back it looks like I am going to throw a kick into my opponent's knee.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Kugai on 04 Jun 2013, 17:47
Just don't break the bed
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Carl-E on 05 Jun 2013, 00:50
I said marital arts, not marital aids...
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 05 Jun 2013, 02:23
I hope to never have to find out how good this stuff actually works.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Patrick on 05 Jun 2013, 02:40
I said marital arts, not marital aids...

whoa man, AIDS? wow this shit got heavy fast
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 05 Jun 2013, 02:42
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/37162448.jpg)
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Patrick on 05 Jun 2013, 02:44
I would also like to posit that this is the only place on the internet where a semi-serious discussion of martial arts is even possible
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: ChaoSera on 05 Jun 2013, 02:48
I started doing Jiu-Jitsu last year and it's pretty great. At the end of this month I was supposed to get my first belt but due to a mix of injuries, bad timing and illness I haven't been able to attend training for quite some time now, so that ship's sailed. The next time there'll be an opportunity I'll get that belt though. :)
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 05 Jun 2013, 03:20
It's a fun way of socialising and great for body and mind. Honestly, I think these sports are the only sports where you can learn a skill applicable outside of the place where you practice. But honestly, application? Several of my teachers have said, independant of each other, that maybe the biggest bonus you get from it is that you don't walk around like a victim anymore, so that you're less likely to get fucked with and that you're more aware of your surroundings so that when the time comes that people get nasty you've already paid the barman and left the building.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: snalin on 05 Jun 2013, 04:11
I did a bit of taekwondo when I was a kid, and the only thing I remember from there is "don't try this stuff. You're not good at it. If you get assaulted, ignore every power fantasy you've ever had, kick 'em in the shin as hard as you can and run like hell".

I've also done some knife stuff - in relation with sword fighting. Blocks, disarms, that kind of thing. The most important thing I got from there was "if he has a knife and wants your wallet, you give him your wallet and walk away".

I don't think traditional martial arts are something I'll pick up. While I could see myself loving to sparr, I find patterns and forms pretty dull to do. Maybe I could do WMA or HEMA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_European_martial_arts) (depending on where you are), as I've done a lot of sword fighting and the duel format is very interesting.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: TheEvilDog on 05 Jun 2013, 08:21
I used to do boxing when I was younger. I was one of the kids who was taller than most of the other kids, so I had a longer reach. It was good, helped me in later years to control my temper, mainly because I am a big guy, 6 foot and about 190lbs, so I can do a lot of damage if I was ever inclined (thankfully, I'm not, in part thanks to the boxing).

Nowadays, I'm kind of getting into Chen Style Tai Chi.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Blue Kitty on 05 Jun 2013, 08:39
I've always been interested in the martial arts. I took it when I was younger and a few years ago they had a free tai chi class at my college. I really should get back into it some time.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 05 Jun 2013, 09:09
Do! It's fun!

Not a valid youtube URL
This would be not applicable.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: lepetitfromage on 05 Jun 2013, 09:13
you've already paid the batman and left the building.

How I read that....


It's also appropriate because one of my exes was/is huuuuuuge into martial arts and thought he was wanted to be batman.

I took a few capoeira classes with him and while very cool in theory, not entirely helpful in practice. At least not after 4 classes.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Lupercal on 06 Jun 2013, 15:11
My only experience was with Taekwondo, which was great, but not great for people like me who are under 6 foot and need a LOT of stretching to be able to get my feet to kick at my own head height, let alone anyone taller than me.

Has anyone got any experience with Aikido? I'm thinking of joining a local place.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 06 Jun 2013, 15:26
Kicks to the head are dangerous in an actual self defense situation, leaves you exposed and off balance for too long, knees and groins are much better targets.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Carl-E on 06 Jun 2013, 21:03
Besides, the head has built in protection - theosse other parts are a lot more vulnerable!   :evil:
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 06 Jun 2013, 23:36
Aikido has no immediate application as a self defence thing (largely, depends on style, aiki-budo, for instance, will take your head off)
but it's so much fun and surprisingly good for cardio. Lots and lots of rolling and throwing, though. Be prepared.

Excellent opportunity to show you an old time favourite:

(Neither of these gentlemen is me, by the way.)
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 06 Jun 2013, 23:53
If you want a solid no nonsense self defense system I recommend you find an accredited Krav Maga school. Stuff is brutal.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Akima on 07 Jun 2013, 15:50
Kicks to the head are dangerous in an actual self defense situation, leaves you exposed and off balance for too long, knees and groins are much better targets.
Even kicks above the knee can be questionable, especially if you are shorter than your opponent. It makes my hair stand on end when I hear some self-defence advice given to women: "Just kick him in the nuts!", because:

1) Men learn early in boyhood that a blow to their genitals hurts a lot. Typically they have very well-established defensive reflex actions.
2) Only a small turn of their body, or step into your attack, will let them take the blow on their leg, and probably body-check you off balance.
2) A kick to the groin is well within "grabbing range", leaving you vulnerable to a throw.

Just take a look at this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHL2Cpb1618) (Soundtrack NSFW). OK, it is not intended to be serious, but presumably the computer self-defence training programme featured is. Note how off-balance the groin-kicker is. If the attack fails to disable the opponent, the kicker is completely uncentred. That is not to say that a groin-kick is impossible, given good technique, timing, and preparation, but a knee-kick is lower-risk and if anything more disabling than a groin blow.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 07 Jun 2013, 15:54
Yep. Honestly? If I'm in my boots I find scraping the shin with the edge of my boot and stomping the foot is a really fun way to distract the hell out of your adversary. Hurts like hell, doesn't cripple any one, and should give you a nice opening to put some hurt else where enough to incapacitate and run for it.

I will say though that assumption 1 is a little off, while men do learn that blows to the genitalia hurt, it's not considered "fair" in a fight and thus doesn't happen very often. This is of course connected to the fallacy that there is a fair fight besides the fight you just won but the defensive reaction isn't as great as you'd expect it to be.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Akima on 07 Jun 2013, 17:17
Having stepped onto the mat, as it were, I should probably introduce myself in this thread. *wushu bow*

I practice taijiquan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_chi), which is often shortened to taiji, and known in English as "Tai Chi", in Chen style. I do this mainly as a physical and mental discipline (the slow forms are sometimes known as "moving meditation"), and to connect to my cultural heritage, but I study under a shifu (master) who takes the traditional view that neglecting martial training denies the practitioner the full benefit of the art. I started "training" when I was about four years old by imitating my Grandma's moves in the yard behind the block of flats we lived in then. I will leave aside the health benefits claimed for taiji, which are rooted in Traditional Chinese Medicine, but I know that I definitely feel better after doing my daily forms. I certainly can't blow holes in brick walls with my qi the way they do in the movies, though!

For people who are only familiar with the slow forms you see performed in parks and other open spaces wherever there is a significant Chinese population, I should perhaps say that taiji is a "full-service" martial-art, in the sense that it includes strikes, locks, throws, and weapon-use (I focus on taijijian sword forms), and so can be seen as both "hard" and "soft", but the philosophy is essentially internal and soft: "Stillness to defeat motion, softness to defeat hardness." It is not an art that is quickly or easily learned, but that is to an extent true of all traditional Chinese martial-arts, since the assumption was that the practitioner would begin training in childhood.

Is it any good for self-defence? Well, I don't carry a sword in daily life, obviously, and like BeoPuppy, I prefer to avoid situations where I might have to put my training to the test. It is far better to avoid trouble than to be forced defend yourself against it. Martial arts training certainly can help you defend yourself, if your training includes realistic elements to prepare you for combat, physically and psychologically, but it is only in the movies that petite women can casually flip around burly goons twice their weight. The sheer shock and speed of a big man's onset in an "honest attack" is not at all easy to handle, no matter how many years you have spent practicing to use an opponent's weight and momentum against them. Realistic training carries a definite risk of injury, and if it did not it would fail in its purpose, but if you shrink from a blitz attack by a larger opponent on the practice-mat, what do you think a real assault will be like?

Ego-driven, power-trip fantasies are the curse of martial-arts, and normally I stay far, far away from internet forums devoted to them. We have spoken in the firearms threads about crazy "Orange Shirt Guys", but there are too many people like that in martial-arts also. As I once heard a shifu put it to some young pupils, "You can't control the world; you can control yourself."
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Alex C on 07 Jun 2013, 18:04
I was a stereotypical lazy geek for pretty much all of my upbringing, which in retrospect, is kinda too bad because it turns out that this Dick guy my dad knew who would be happy to teach me some stuff turned out to be this guy (http://www.theacademymn.com/Kotasek-Dick.html). I guess that's the problem when you live through two divorces by the age of 15; for a while I think my base assumption was just that my dad was full of shit about everything ever so I wasn't really paying attention when he talked about it. In fairness to myself, he did do a lot of coke so I wasn't entirely off base.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 07 Jun 2013, 22:24
*returns Akima's bow with a Okinawan styled bow in return*

I have great respect for any practitioner of Taiji, it requires fairly extreme discipline to my knowledge, especially in younger individuals and I can respect that. I also like "full service" martial arts in a general sense.

I suppose I didn't really do a full background explanation.

I trained for about 15 years in a system mostly rooted in Okinawan Kempo that came out of Hawaii in that particular island's bad days. Back when Professor (now the master of a continent wide martial arts system with thousands of practitioners) was coming up, there was two parts to a martial arts class, training in the dojo, and then getting your street clothes on and going out with your fellow students to fight students of other schools to test the new things you learned in class, if it worked it was kept, what didn't work these particularly brutal martial artists discarded. As Professor became Professor he began to incorporate different styles he'd picked up into a solid philosophy of defense where each technique is simply an option. Throws, locks, grabs, and strikes are all taught and available. Weapons training with improvised "street fight" weapons is performed along with more traditional Okinawan weapons like kama. Most of the focus remains on practical self defense however. This is the school I turned down a black belt in.

I also did a couple years in the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program (you couldn't guess right?) which is jokingly referred to as "Semper Fu". Unfortunately I find MCMAP to be extremely lacking in actual hand to hand combat training like the old Lion system, while you can learn some fighting stuff here, it's mostly an excuse for hazing and extremely brutal PT, least in my area.

Weapons note: I've done a little rapier training in the Capoferro school of Italian rapier fencing, but not much, my knees can't really handle the extended postures required for it. I'm also pretty good with knives and bayonet fighting. I'm also a fair shot with a rifle or pistol, but I have a hard time counting them as martial arts for some reason.

As of this fall assuming I move to Denver (95% chance) I'll be starting to train in Iaido assuming Murphy doesn't step in, and I'll probably find an MMA gym to start working out at. I'm kinda at a point where from a hand to hand stand point, I just want to beat the crap out of things. It's a poor mental attitude on my part, but there's a place where as a martial artist, I feel like I can't advance without having the ever loving hell beaten out of me a few times.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 07 Jun 2013, 23:14
One problem with unarmed self-defense is that multiple attackers are common. Remember from elementary school how the bullies had hangers-on? Eddie Izzard's comment on being bashed for cross-dressing was "Ever notice there's always five of them?".

For those in good enough shape to use it effectively, one of the best pieces of martial arts equipment for that situation is usually made in China, the running shoe.

Oh, health benefits of tai chi? This is anecdotal, but I saw one documentary which showed a long-time practitioner. I went "Wow, I hope I can move that well when I'm 70!". Punch line: he was 90.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 08 Jun 2013, 00:38
Fact: If you are being engaged by multiple opponents you are in a lethal force situation. If you're unarmed caving a knee or two in to open an escape route up and legging it is your best possible option, but scientifically speaking you're in it deep at that point.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Lupercal on 08 Jun 2013, 02:50
Kicks to the head are dangerous in an actual self defense situation, leaves you exposed and off balance for too long, knees and groins are much better targets.

Well, it wasn't for 'self defence' purposes (although learning to kick properly at the shin was). The only way to properly win sparring matches and to get to senior student level is to be able to kick at head height. Taekwondo literally means 'the way of the foot and hand'. Our teacher was very strict on not applying absolutely everything we learned at TKD to be used in a self-defence situation. Common sense > blue belt techniques.

Aikido has no immediate application as a self defence thing (largely, depends on style, aiki-budo, for instance, will take your head off)
but it's so much fun and surprisingly good for cardio. Lots and lots of rolling and throwing, though. Be prepared.

Excellent opportunity to show you an old time favourite:

(Neither of these gentlemen is me, by the way.)

Yeah the local club is Aiki-Budo-Kai - is it a particularly hard-edged strain of the art? It sounds like a lot of fun anyways, I've never done a martial art that includes rolling and throwing before. I would have thought that grips/holds are possibly more useful than say, punching someone in the face (if we're talking about real life situations), but I would just like to get back into doing something so physical. My brother does Jujitsu and seems to absolutely love it, so I figure I should give this a shot. The same place also offers Karate once a week so may give that a chance if I'm feeling like I need to do more sparring. That video is great, it's that kind of flawless movement and gravitas that you strive towards when picking up a martial art.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 09 Jun 2013, 02:22
Kicks to the head are dangerous in an actual self defense situation, leaves you exposed and off balance for too long, knees and groins are much better targets.

Well, it wasn't for 'self defence' purposes (although learning to kick properly at the shin was). The only way to properly win sparring matches and to get to senior student level is to be able to kick at head height. Taekwondo literally means 'the way of the foot and hand'. Our teacher was very strict on not applying absolutely everything we learned at TKD to be used in a self-defence situation. Common sense > blue belt techniques.

Ahhh I missed the comments about sparring, my apologies. Yeah kicks to the head are freaking AWESOME for points sparring. A kick's two points and putting your leg upside someone's skull is just shy of impossible for the corner judges to miss. My legs are jacked these days but I could probably train back to the point where I can kick dudes a couple inches taller then me in the skull without too much issue. Again for sparring purposes a kick or blow to the head is great on tall dudes. They don't expect it and have never worried about it before for the most part. It shakes them up a little. (Well in addition to the brain rattle you just gave'em)

So I have a slightly interesting subject, weapons forms have literally been part of martial arts since their development to one end or another, and many weapons have their own styles and arts independent of any other system. (Iaido, Kenjutsu, various knife, stick and a great many other weapons forms) so comes my question, does firearms training count as martial arts? Or perhaps only limited forms of weapons training focused on combat or self defense? It's obviously not the same as traditional martial arts in the modern day and age, that might look something more like Equilibrium's gun kata.

However there is undoubtedly form and technique applied to developing these real world combat techniques, stance in particular is vital to turning your body into a fast, mobile and above all accurate shooting platform, in particular with pistols, for which poor stance is absolutely disastrous. Mental acuity and situational awareness, prized in all martial arts, is vital to the combat or defensive shooter in "the field", being aware of your surrounds is the ultimate key to survival, though added technique like assessing, selecting and moving to cover is mostly unique to firearms. For some video example of a high level combat shooter engaging in competition "three gun" shooting, which is highly tactical in nature, I'd like to present a brief compilation of Army Staff Sergeant Daniel Horner.
(When he's firing up into the air with his shotgun he's taking out clay pigeons)

I honestly don't have much of an opinion either way, though I personally have never thought of or referred to marksmanship training as martial arts practice.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 09 Jun 2013, 03:03
It is if archery is.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 09 Jun 2013, 03:37
Archery... can be? I dunno Kyudo is considered a martial art, and the Japanese practice a lot of their traditional bow arts in addition to meditative archery (I actually do something similar with a rifle every now and then to relax after a day on the range) but in Europe we've lost a lot of "combat" archery or even traditional archery forms that used to be the standard, with modern sport archery almost completely supplanting the old techniques and ways.

(Apologies for the voice over in this video)
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 09 Jun 2013, 04:46
There are more than a few clubs keeping ancient bowshooting traditions alive. And they practice and hold competitions and stuff. It seems a martial art to me.

I loved equilibrium's action sequences. Other than that it's a poor man's 1984, of course.



(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: ackblom12 on 09 Jun 2013, 04:49
Equilibrium is basically a fan fiction crossover of 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and The Matrix. It's just so stupid and fun it's glorious.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Patrick on 09 Jun 2013, 14:39
If you want a solid no nonsense self defense system I recommend you find a gun

ftfy
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 09 Jun 2013, 21:26
Well, that works too, but I'm all for hand to hand training in addition to learning how to use a shotgun, pistol or rifle. Worst case you learn something, become better disciplined and more aware and get in better shape.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 10 Jun 2013, 00:37
Equilibrium is basically a fan fiction crossover of 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and The Matrix. It's just so stupid and fun it's glorious.

That could be a description of real life.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 10 Jun 2013, 01:03
That sounds a bit negative, considering the movies involved.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Jace on 10 Jun 2013, 01:07
[video]
(Apologies for the voice over in this video)

The one girl they show in this as a fast archer is shooting giant carpets, is hardly accurate because of that fact, and yeah I could draw and shoot as fast if I didn't have to worry about actually aiming.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: ackblom12 on 10 Jun 2013, 01:15
That sounds a bit negative, considering the movies involved.

The key words you should pay attention to are 'fan fiction'.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 10 Jun 2013, 01:48
[video]
(Apologies for the voice over in this video)

The one girl they show in this as a fast archer is shooting giant carpets, is hardly accurate because of that fact, and yeah I could draw and shoot as fast if I didn't have to worry about actually aiming.

Right but she's not the point of the video, she's an example of the modern form of archery trying and failing to replicate older techniques, Lars is firing faster then she is while accurately hitting point targets, even piercing chain mail with those same shots.

Y
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: ChaoSera on 28 Jun 2013, 01:33
And up it goes!

I was on a festival this weekend and on one day I was teaching some of the girls some rudimentary self-defense techniques. At one point a buddy of mine asked me to demonstrate a hip throw (I'm not sure if this is a correct translation but I think you get what I mean). Of course I declined, insisting that it'd hurt him on this kind of ground, but he kept bugging me. I was a little drunk so after a while I gave in after all. The girls were in awe seeing it and my friend said it didn't hurt too much.
Two days later, when we were driving home, he told me his knee was still hurting from the fall. I feel kinda bad about using my skills in this kind of situation and hurting him in the process, but I warned him it wasn't a good idea. So I guess the moral of this story is: Don't drink and practice martial arts. (This sounds not nearly as good as Don't drink and drive...)
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Sorflakne on 28 Jun 2013, 10:06
Bruce Lee stated that someone who'd trained for a couple years in boxing and wrestling could take on any Eastern martial arts practitioner in a no-holds fight and beat them.  He was also an advocate of simplicity, hence his quote, "I do not fear the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times".  It makes sense: learning 4-6 basic attacks and how to improvise them in a fight is more effective than having to learn 40-60 attacks (I exaggerate, but you get the idea).

And looking at Western martial arts from the late medieval-early Renaissance (those that documentation has survived), you can see similarities to some Eastern arts.  Here's a video of moves from a Talhoffer fight manual.  Keep in mind these moves were used against armored opponents, hence the lack of punches/chops:

Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 08 Jul 2013, 01:17
Lee was always a smart guy, and in my experience (though I find it lacking) mastery isn't learning many complex movements, it's being able to perform simple moves extremely well.

Any Aikidoka in this thread? I'm scouting potential training in Delaware for something to do in addition to taking up yoga (apparently fairly brutal, and it won't destroy my already Code Three knees.)

This dojo looks legit enough: http://www.aikidoda.org/

But I know nothing about Aikido except it's a Japanese martial art, and that it's big on throws from what I recall.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Thomas Edison on 08 Jul 2013, 11:14
(http://s21.postimg.org/di4a8pr3r/tumblr_mo4p6f4_Ht_B1rbs1f8o1_400.gif)
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: ev4n on 23 Jul 2013, 12:36
1) Men learn early in boyhood that a blow to their genitals hurts a lot. Typically they have very well-established defensive reflex actions.
2) Only a small turn of their body, or step into your attack, will let them take the blow on their leg, and probably body-check you off balance.
3) A kick to the groin is well within "grabbing range", leaving you vulnerable to a throw.

1 - having been in a room full of black belts who were being trained how to adjust their stances in a fight to defend against it, I think you're overstating the case.

2. - better defense is to press your knees forwards and together.  Keeps your opponent in front of you, and it's quicker.

3 - yes.  On the other hand, if it lands, the fight is OVER.  Which is kind of the point of self defense.

Bruce Lee stated that someone who'd trained for a couple years in boxing and wrestling could take on any Eastern martial arts practitioner in a no-holds fight and beat them.

I'd bet most boxers have excellent footwork.  You'd have to.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: ev4n on 09 Apr 2014, 09:20
It's important to learn something every day.  Today, my wife learned that it's not "Rathburt's tail", it's "grasp birds tail".
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 09 Apr 2014, 13:09
Lady Mondegreen strikes again.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: The Seldom Killer on 09 Apr 2014, 14:27
A couple of months ago I started Qigong. I wanted to do something of a martial art and did consider the combat and defensive arts but found the description very appealing. I think it matches well with my capacity for patience and discipline. Also its a good contrast with running and cycling which both carry a heavy emphasis on a persistence of motion. I enjoy taking some time to make sure I  really slow down and stop.
The Sifu also teaches Tai Chi, Chun Yeun and Wing Chun so I could take up a defense art as well if I want to later. I'll just stick to Qigong for the moment though until I'm a bit more advanced.  The one martial art that does interest me is a fictional one. A Systema variant the William Gibson describes as defending by simply going away using force where necessary (see Spook Country).
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Taekwondoin on 09 Apr 2014, 15:24
I can't believe I missed this thread.

I'm a 2nd Dan black belt in ITF Taekwondo, as well as holding a 1st Dan in Kukkiwon Taekwondo, I also practice Judo and have reached 1st Kyu and am currently building points towards my 1st Dan in that too. I've trained in Taekwondo since I was 5, I had a break from the age of 17 to 21, then took it up again, and I've learnt underneath this instructor for the last 7 years.

Martial arts is great for self defence, because someone who practices it fully will know when to get the hell out of a situation before it becomes violent. Verbal de-escalation should also be taught, talking your way out of a situation in a calm and controlled manner devoid of threats. If it does come to fisticuffs, well as long as you realise that fending off an attack is not the same as sparring then I always find it prudent to remember that the fight usually leaves people after 30 seconds, that's a long time to receive some damage, but if it's truly 1 on 1, then it's not a lot of time to evade attack, space allowing. It's also worth remembering that one good connect will end a fight, that's both you as the defender giving the attack, or receiving it. Sometimes no amount of training will prepare you for that one punch to the gut that they somehow just manage to connect just right.

In terms of actually applying any of this, well the last fight I got into (and only fight as an adult) was three years ago, and after a lot of being pushed around and basically trying to back out, I lashed out at his knee and then used an open palm under his chin and pretty much threw the guy to the floor. He hit a flowerpot on the way down and passed out cold, the police got involved, there were a lot of witnesses to say that I acted in self defence, so I was let off any charges, but for that split second before he came around again I thought I'd killed him (adrenaline does some weird things to your head) and I can honestly say that was the worst point in my entire life. Fortunately, martial arts has also given me some of the highest points too.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Lupercal on 10 Apr 2014, 16:18
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t1.0-9/1558466_845082722175111_6822559393291450581_n.jpg)

So June last year I was asking about Aikido. I joined my local club and am now 5th Kyu (yellow belt). I do love Aikido, the way we train actually has a fair few real-world applications too. What I'm doing above as uke is a chest level punch, and my partner (3rd Dan) will soon hug my head to his shoulder, turn his hips, and throw me to the floor. This was from a training session where we did some Aiki-Jujitsu type training, as we just graded last week. Tomorrow I'm heading off for a week long training camp with the club, which should be great fun. The club also does Kendo every other week, and it's improving my knowledge of form very well (especially wrist cuts and extensions).

The club instructor was clear to warn me that I'm now in the more dangerous part of my training - I know enough to have confidence but my form needs refining. I still have trouble rolling properly, something that comes with practice I believe. Roll on orange belt!
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Akima on 11 Apr 2014, 02:58
Today, my wife learned that it's not "Rathburt's tail", it's "grasp birds tail".
The picturesque (and often variable) names of some taiji (tai-chi) forms can be a bit of a barrier to new students, but your wife's shifu should really have provided a written sheet or chart.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 11 Apr 2014, 03:42
The only set we had that my sensei gave a more "old school" style name to was something I think he stole from an anime or manga "Monkey Snatches Peach" and that was only because you can't just out and out say "Rip the opponents balls off" if there are parents or younger students around.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: BeoPuppy on 11 Apr 2014, 14:08
[...]
 What I'm doing above as uke is a chest level punch, and my partner (3rd Dan) will soon hug my head to his shoulder, turn his hips, and throw me to the floor.
[...]
Irimi-Nage. I'm just not very good with Irimi. The omote versions are okay, but the left ura is soooo bad.

Still, aikido is fun!
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: The Seldom Killer on 09 Jun 2014, 14:28
The Grandmaster is visiting from China so I headed over to Manchester for a seminar. It was really good to meet my teacher's teacher. Genuinely lovely guy and very open and free with his time and knowledge. We didn't do a lot with Qigong as there was a lot of demand from the Wing Chun students. Really impressive to watch the sparing at the end though.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Akima on 14 Nov 2014, 17:11

I think this is rather awesome. Of course I would tend to identify with the massed ranks of volley-firing crossbowmen who ought to be shooting back, but that is a discussion more appropriate to the military history thread.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 15 Nov 2014, 21:30
Horse cavalry and Horse archers have proven quite damaging to massed rank ANYTHING. Including crossbowmen and archers.


Cav up!
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: hedgie on 15 Nov 2014, 21:34
Still, there's the whole "shoal of fish" idea in play.  A single archer, or maybe even a few dozen on horses may do a lot of damage, but are individually more likely to become all corpseified than anyone in the massed ranks, since some other poor fucker is likely to get hit instead.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Dalillama on 16 Nov 2014, 02:22

I also did a couple years in the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program (you couldn't guess right?) which is jokingly referred to as "Semper Fu". Unfortunately I find MCMAP to be extremely lacking in actual hand to hand combat training like the old Lion system, while you can learn some fighting stuff here, it's mostly an excuse for hazing and extremely brutal PT, least in my area.

The official purpose of the MCMAP and similar unarmed combat training from other branches and armed forces is A) PT and B)Instilling aggression.  Actually using it to fight is somewhere around G, because they figure that if you're in a military situation and you're unarmed, you're pretty much fucked anyway.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 16 Nov 2014, 07:25
No shit? :D

Holy crap. Almost like I spent a significant amount of time in the system, managed the training program and even taught the stuff occasionally! Further it's almost like this thread is about actual martial arts, so while Mcslap is worth mentioning in my experiences, pointing out that it's completely lacking in actual useful hand to hand training is probably relevant.

You're wrong though. As presently instructed A. is sanctioned hazing B. is PT and C is instilling aggression. D. is making hasty excuses for A-C by saying you're training Marines to handle any situation whether you're out in town on liberty or actually in the fight. Actual combat skills is probably somewhere around R. Simply because that's all the levels of administrative bullshit you have to get through.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Akima on 16 Nov 2014, 14:05
Horse cavalry and Horse archers have proven quite damaging to massed rank ANYTHING. Including crossbowmen and archers.
Yes indeed, but I was speaking of cultural identification rather than commenting on the effectiveness of cavalry or horse archers. Mounted steppe peoples were a constant pressure on China for thousands of years. Sometimes they conquered us (Mongols, Manchu), sometimes we conquered them (Han, Qing), often it went back and forth for centuries. But it is beyond the scope of this thread to discuss the combined arms tactics with which China's armies faced peoples who were, on average, much better horsemen than we were.

I don't know much about MCMAP. I had the impression that it was mainly a grappling-based system, but I just read the Wikipedia article and I'm not so sure. Coloured belts are lame though; It should be enough to receive a grudging nod from your sifu. If you're lucky, and he's feeling generous.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: GarandMarine on 16 Nov 2014, 14:39
It's one of the reasons I prefer the LINE system. No belts. No bullshit. No extraneous crap. It is a highly efficient system for dishing lethal force on an opponent in hand to hand combat. Mcslap has just made us weaker, especially with turning it into a haze fest and removing any potentially useful martial arts training from it. MCMAP itself is one of the many hybrid martial arts styles that can be found out in the world, much like my own primary style, Universal Kempo. MCMAP itself is kinda all over the place, without any real grounding in it's style beyond Japanese karate and I believe Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu with an ungodly amount of other things mixed in for flavor, which I happen to think is a good thing. MCMAP has a lot of potential as a program, but with current implementation it will never be successful as a hand to hand training tool.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Akima on 07 Dec 2014, 13:40
I initially posted in reply to J in the Pointless thread, but it didn't really belong there, so...
(http://i.imgur.com/ApSSeXz.gif)
The imbecile in the beige coat is an example of the reason I don't generally tell people that I practice a martial art; idiots want to "try it on". What was he thinking? And however much he deserved it, that head-kick would not qualify as self-defence in Australia, and the soldier (I assume) could find himself in serious trouble. :-(
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: LeeC on 19 Jan 2015, 19:35
A video about half swording.
Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: Sorflakne on 26 Jan 2015, 16:14
Another year and a half before I can start cut and thrust training with my SCA group (they require at least two years certification with rapier).  I want to learn I.33, but the main CnT instructor in our group is encouraging me to go Bolognese, which is a later period style, but we'll see what happens in 2016.  I mainly want to do sword and buckler, but longsword is also included, so I'll be picking that up as well.  Sword and buckler goes something like this:

Title: Re: Martial arts: theory and practice
Post by: LeeC on 30 Mar 2015, 10:58