Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Norbert G. Matausch" <NMATAUSC@****.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de>
Subject: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:17:29 +1000
On Mon, 29 Jul 1996 12:58:57 -0400 (EDT), Marc A Renouf wrote:

> Punching, kicking, choking, grappling, and all the
> basic messy techniques that make combat fun are what I would classify as
> "unarmed combat." It's not until you get into the more refined stuff of
> how to get *more* out of your attack or do more complicated techniques
> that you would get more deeply into the concentrations that are the
> various martial arts styles.

Experience has proved that these certain "more complicated"
techniques are worth nothing in combat. In combat, all that counts
are fast, hard and precise "basic" techniques (these include
roundhouse kicks). The fancy techniques fail most of the time, unless
you have an opponent who's a true dilettante.


> Also, most martial arts teach more than just "unarmed combat"
> when translated to SRII skill terms. For example, I study Ninjutsu, and
> I'd have to say that the skills I have learned have encompassed both
> armed and unarmed combat, thrown weapons, and athletics. Throw in a
> little psychology, and you find that, like most martial arts, its more
> than just punching and kicking.

In fact, almost all martial arts have some kind of "psychology" they
teach to the students. However, this "fighting spirit" is not a thing
that can be learned in dojos only. Take an experienced street
brawler. These men are really dangerous.
(A funny anecdote here: three years ago, we had a seminar on
grappling and ground-fighting techniques. There were also lots of
black-belts coming from Karate, Ninjutsu or Tae Kwon Do, and several
"masters" (sifus) in different Kung-fu styles. And there was a almost
toothless man in his mid-fourties, pot-bellied and rather fat. When
it came to fighting without rules, however, this man beat the living
hell out of the masters and black-belts. Curious , what his style
might be, we asked him after the seminar was over. He laughed loud
(and boy, it was *funny*, with him having no teeth and all) and said:
"Nothing. I just go brawling sometimes. Bars, y'know." Oops.)





Norbert

-------------------------------------------------------------------
BLAM. BLAM.
"Stop."
BLAM. BLAM.
"Police."
Message no. 2
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 14:13:14 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 29 Jul 1996, Norbert G. Matausch wrote:

>
> On Mon, 29 Jul 1996 12:58:57 -0400 (EDT), Marc A Renouf wrote:
>
> > Punching, kicking, choking, grappling, and all the
> > basic messy techniques that make combat fun are what I would classify as
> > "unarmed combat." It's not until you get into the more refined stuff
of
> > how to get *more* out of your attack or do more complicated techniques
> > that you would get more deeply into the concentrations that are the
> > various martial arts styles.
>
> Experience has proved that these certain "more complicated"
> techniques are worth nothing in combat. In combat, all that counts
> are fast, hard and precise "basic" techniques (these include
> roundhouse kicks). The fancy techniques fail most of the time, unless
> you have an opponent who's a true dilettante.

This is so true. When you find yourself in a bad situation, it's
not the flashy, intricate, bizarre technique you learned as part of a
247-step kata that saves you. It's the dull, boring, infinitely-repeated
drills of the simple stuff that your *body* remembers and pulls out when it
becomes necessary to use it.

> In fact, almost all martial arts have some kind of "psychology" they
> teach to the students. However, this "fighting spirit" is not a thing
> that can be learned in dojos only. Take an experienced street
> brawler. These men are really dangerous.

Agreed. Oddly enough, boxers are dangerous, too. Most martial
artists are trained to block or avoid blows. Boxers learn to take them,
and they do speed and power drills endlessly. The combination of a quick
fighter who can take hits and still dish them out is something to be wary
of. If he knows enough to guards his legs too, watch out. They don't do
so well against weapons, though...

Marc
Message no. 3
From: Wynd <jeltzz@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 21:49:56 +1000
Marc A Renouf wrote:

> Agreed. Oddly enough, boxers are dangerous, too. Most martial
> artists are trained to block or avoid blows. Boxers learn to take them,
> and they do speed and power drills endlessly. The combination of a quick
> fighter who can take hits and still dish them out is something to be wary
> of. If he knows enough to guards his legs too, watch out. They don't do
> so well against weapons, though...
>

Problem boxers have is that they train with those bloody huge gloves.
Means they don't always learn to close their fists properly. If you
can take it just as well as they can, they're likely to break their
wrists. You'll find most people don't go too well against weapons,
and notice that most styles, especially karate, don't teach weapons
until after black belt.

--
Wynd, Classical Gung-Fu Student.
<jeltzz@*******.com.au>
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~jeltzz

"For I am known, | "The Ravens took flight,
As the Fallen One, | and the sky, just moments Winter's white
He-Who-Walks-Alone, | turned black, as if night had descended"
Under Star, Moon and Sun." | - Flight of the Ravens
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Message no. 4
From: Marc Lipshitz <MLIPSHIT@****.CO.ZA>
Subject: Martial Arts: the differences -Reply
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:05:37 +0200
>>> Norbert G. Matausch
Experience has proved that these certain "more complicated" techniques
are worth nothing in combat. In combat, all that counts are fast, hard and
precise "basic" techniques (these include roundhouse kicks). The fancy
techniques fail most of the time, unless you have an opponent who's a
true dilettante.


Gotta, disagree with you, the one time I've been involoved in a serious
fight, what won it for me was switching from punching/kicking to
suddenly moving in on the guy and throwing him in a shoulder throw head
first into the ground. The fancy techniques ARE useful and make a
difference, but are used sparingly. I've done the same in all style
competitions, sudden changes in style and technique are highly effective
in catching people off guard and creating openings.
Marc
Message no. 5
From: "Sascha Pabst" <Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 09:45:25 +0000
On 29 Jul 96 at 14:13, Marc A Renouf wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 1996, Norbert G. Matausch wrote:
> > [Big snip] Take an experienced street
> > brawler. These men are really dangerous.
> > Agreed. Oddly enough, boxers are dangerous, too. Most martial
> artists are trained to block or avoid blows. Boxers learn to take them,
> and they do speed and power drills endlessly. The combination of a quick
> fighter who can take hits and still dish them out is something to be wary
> of. If he knows enough to guards his legs too, watch out. They don't do
> so well against weapons, though...
Agreed. BTW, alltime-favourite-weapon: filled ashtrey. Available in most bars,
can be used in almost infinite ways. I heard more of these then I saw ("Well,
and then he did THAT and you went down..." :-( ) but the basic throw-ash-in-
opponent's-face is good for starters. And it's quite unconspicious: nearly
nobody minds someone who takes his time to exinguish his cigarette... :-)

Sascha
--
+---___---------+----------------------------------------+--------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst |The one who does not|
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.de| learn from history |
| \___ __/ | | is bound to live |
|==== \_/ ======| *Wearing hats is just a way of life* | through it again. |
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me | |
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary -----------------+
Message no. 6
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:22:51 -0600 (CST)
>Problem boxers have is that they train with those bloody huge gloves.
>Means they don't always learn to close their fists properly. If you
>can take it just as well as they can, they're likely to break their
>wrists. You'll find most people don't go too well against weapons,
>and notice that most styles, especially karate, don't teach weapons
>until after black belt.

I was in Kenpo (Okinawan Shodokan) and we start with weapons at orange belt
(third rank). We also start fairly early at sparring unarmed against
weapons. I am also one promotion away from black in judo. I was also trained
in unarmed combat by the SEALs.

Ahz
Message no. 7
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 07:28:07 -0600 (MDT)
Wynd wrote:
|
|You'll find most people don't go too well against weapons,
|and notice that most styles, especially karate, don't teach weapons
|until after black belt.

I believe (could be wrong) that two of the best anti weapon
styles are Hopkido(sp?) and Aikido. Or, any style that
teaches you to get out of an opponent's line of attack.

And, there's a Karate dojo in Denver, CO, that teaches
weapons to the lower belts (there's always an exception :)

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like
underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~~~~
Message no. 8
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 16:13:39 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 29 Jul 1996, Wynd wrote:

> Problem boxers have is that they train with those bloody huge gloves.
> Means they don't always learn to close their fists properly.

They also don't ever learn to use their hands. No grappling,
clawing, grabbing, eye-poking, gouging, or pulling. I sparred with some
Savate guys once and I found that the damn gloves cut my dirty-trick
repertoire down to an unacceptable level. So I was forced to start
stepping on feet...
Just goes to show that a difference in training reflects itself
in the differences in how people *use* their skills.

> You'll find most people don't go too well against weapons,
> and notice that most styles, especially karate, don't teach weapons
> until after black belt.

Heh. Learn early. Learn well.

Marc
Message no. 9
From: Wynd <jeltzz@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 05:55:58 +1000
David Buehrer wrote:
>
> Wynd wrote:
> |
> |You'll find most people don't go too well against weapons,
> |and notice that most styles, especially karate, don't teach weapons
> |until after black belt.
>
> I believe (could be wrong) that two of the best anti weapon
> styles are Hopkido(sp?) and Aikido. Or, any style that
> teaches you to get out of an opponent's line of attack.

Standard Technique: Run

> And, there's a Karate dojo in Denver, CO, that teaches
> weapons to the lower belts (there's always an exception :)

Which is why I said most, because that's my experience
with most.

--
Wynd, the Zen-Taoist-Celtic Mystic-Poet-Philosopher-Warrior-Dude
<jeltzz@*******.com.au>
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~jeltzz

"For I am known, | "The Ravens took flight,
As the Fallen One, | and the sky, just moments Winter's white
He-Who-Walks-Alone, | turned black, as if night had descended"
Under Star, Moon and Sun." | - Flight of the Ravens
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Message no. 10
From: Jamie Houston <s430472@*******.gu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts: the differences
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:07:28 +1000 (EST)
On Tue, 30 Jul 1996, Sascha Pabst wrote:


[snip]

> Agreed. BTW, alltime-favourite-weapon: filled ashtrey. Available in most bars,
> can be used in almost infinite ways. I heard more of these then I saw ("Well,
> and then he did THAT and you went down..." :-( ) but the basic throw-ash-in-
> opponent's-face is good for starters. And it's quite unconspicious: nearly
> nobody minds someone who takes his time to exinguish his cigarette... :-)
>
> Sascha

The ashtray sounds cool, but you can't deny that an adept with missile
mastery and a few empty scotch bottles is a real pain in the ass in bar
brawls *grin*. Trust me...it's extremely hard to keep your mind on
brawling when you have to dodge periodic flying glass!
It's also very effective at taking out smart-ass mages sitting in corners
whipping of stun bolts... "Oh yeah...do that with a Jack Daniels label
imprinted on your forehead.." 8-}

Hamish

------------------------------------------------
I'm not insane...but Mr Flibble, my invisible
friend, is a total looney!
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

Hamish, the Mad Scot
AKA Jamie Houston when not in a kilt
s430472@*****.student.gu.edu.au

/\/\/\/\//\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
"So I kill, maim, destroy and dismember...
Does that make me a bad person?"
-----------------------------------------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Martial Arts: the differences, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!