Replies

To your further comments:

Grappling/street: agreed.

Krav Maga: Heh, I didn't know KM skipped non-lethal alternatives to their techniques? Interesting. I hope you refrain from putting other people's noses into their brains even if they're not your friends if there's any alternative :)

TKD/Thai: counter-example being Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. Agreed about point sparring, TKD being largely the sport version of Korean MA.

Karate: I'm not familiar with every variant style, but I suspect there is more difference between instructors of the same style than there is between different denominations of Karate.

Also remember kids' MA classes just aren't going to have adult-level training.

But you did hit the two key points:

1. Commercial schools have to keep their customers happy and their bills paid, so some promote when they shouldn't.
and
2. Martial arts are more than just beat-up schools; which makes stuff like kata worthwhile if your goals reach further than street fighting, and worthless if not.

I think your post had perfect eloquence (and quite succinct .....personally one of my problems is that if i can write it in 10 paragraphs instead of 1 sentence i will use the 10 paragraphs LOL).

I guess it boils down to what the person wants .....and obviously there are many who do not want a combative style. Some want an artistic form of physical expression (which is why they would take things like Wushu), others want a way to esoteric health (hence Taichi and Pakua ....although unknown to most Westerners Taichi used to be one of the most effective combat styles ....but in the west it is basically old Chinese folk doing it slowly in the park) , and some may want something that unites personal expression with self-defense (Karate, gung fu, TKD ...although again there is a tendency to just focus on Katas in the west ......when elsewhere they explain what the kata is and how it can be used pragmatically).

Then there are martial arts that are meant for self-defense. Examples are jeet kune do, combat sambo and Muay Thai (i know muay thai has a lot of competition, but it is easily applied to the street as has been proven many times).

And then there are what i call 'offense' styles. A good example is krav maga ....which although marketed as a 'self-defense' style is actually an overt offense system created by the Israeli special forces to best be able to kill or maim quickly. I do not know how Krav maga in the US is taught (i did not take mine here but in Kenya, which has a good number of Israelis) ..but back 'home' the techniques i was taught were such that i could not use them unless i really had to. And not just unarmed stuff but also interesting titbits like carrying a credit card that was sharpened on one edge, and how to effectively use it to rip someone's throat to shreds!

Anyways Krav Maga is a great art, and it is extremely applicable for self defense, however if what someone wants is 'self expression' then they better look at Ving Tsun or wushu! If they want 'health and balance' then Pakuachang or Taichichuan would be great (although again i reiterate in China a Taichi exponent learns both soft and hard styles ....and Taichi hard style looks exactly like gung fu hard styles .....the best example of real taichi is Goju-ryu karate which also has soft and hard aspects). If someone wants balance take karate or TKD (but ensure you have a teacher who wants to teach you and not just take your cash). Self-defense think JKD or Krav maga (and if you have little time take Krav because in a month you will have learnt a lot).

As for grappling it is important and should be added to every regimen (especially the self-defnse/offense arts) ...but by itself it is only good for competition because if your strategy on the streets is to immediately go into the guard position, and there are 2 sots heading towards you with malicious grins, then chances are your mug will be pretty messed up! Grappling is nice to know because you must know what to do if you end up on the ground, but you better know something else for stand up. However if all you want to do is compete then by all means take judo or jujitsu solo (actually some highschool students study jujitsu, and then go into school wrestling matches as 'wrestlers' and beat the heck out of the wrestlers).

I guess the important thing is to take what you want ...and to know what you want. Otherwise a person may end up taking Taichi (american version) when they should be taking muay thai!

As for Bill Wallace his success came from the same reason he was called superfoot. That guy's left (or is it right ....i know he only used one foot for kicking) foot was just super-fast .....and even though his opponents knew he would use that particular foot there was still nothing they could do to stop him from knocking them out.

And i think he is/was a great fighter.

However i would like to see him in his prime (around 1.5/2 decades ago) face a current Kyukoshin exponent (or a current muay thai dude). Basically it is my personal opinion that the greats of yesteryear (eg superfoot, Chuck norris etc) would really not do that well today. For example i have seen past fights of Norris (in the 70s when he was unbeaten and was a competitor) and to be honest he is much faster and seemingly much better nowadays (when he is a 50+ actor well past his prime). I think the key factor is cross-training ...i believe in the 70s he used to take Tang soo do but then years later started adding new stuff.

Superfoot would also be still a great fast fighter ....but if you matched him (assuming you could take him to his prime) against a current Kyushikai fighter i think Superfoot for all his speed would eat dirt.

Nowadays virtually every martial art is totally different from what it was 2 decades ago. Some are better, many are worse ...but virtually all have changed.