Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 377460" data-attributes="member: 177">*sigh*.  The "which style is best" argument.  When you ask the question "which style is best?" there's an implicit extention - the best at what?  The best at increasing your overall physical fitness?  The best at teaching you personal discipline?  The best at beating someone else in a very controlled sparring situation?  The best at dealing with variable terrain?  The best at dealing with multiple opponents?  The best at getting you out of a mugging in one piece?In any case, we must remember that the art is no better than the person who uses it.There are a number of plausible reasons for the apparent success of Gracie/Brazilian jiu jitsu that have little to do with the actual superiority of the form.  For instance, note above - the art is only as good as the artists.  Perhaps the Gracies were about as good as they come, and would have won using other arts if they had studied them as assiduously.  Then, having earned fame for their art, they attract the people who would again be great fighters in any one of a number of arts.  Self selection in a fairly small pool of contestants will skew results.  And it isn't like these contests deal with what you'd call a statistically relevant sample of fighters, folks.However, the best point is very, very simple, and very powerful: The real greatest fighters have little to prove, and don't go into these nonsense"Ultimate Fighting Championship" things.  Honestly, do you think the real best of the best go in for such tawdry spectacle?In the end, the whole argument is pretty meaningless.  If you're Ed Gruberman, choosing an art so you'll be the best at booting head, you're probably studying martial arts for the wrong reasons...</blockquote>

Verification