Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Darth Shoju" data-source="post: 3463214" data-attributes="member: 11397">I don't think you can discount martial-arts from any region in favour of another. If you look at modern MMA, it is generally a synthesis of greco-roman wrestling, jiu-jitsu (particularly Brazilian style) and various types of striking (classic boxing, "dirty" boxing and muay-thai boxing). However, it depends largely upon the practitioner. There are examples of fighters that rely heavily on one or two martial-arts and do well (many that are pure wrestlers, a few judo fighters, sambo, etc). Still, MMA competitions aren't necessarily a perfect litmus test as established rules often hinder many of the more brutal martial-arts while favouring others (such as wrestling or boxing). Bruce Lee (considered by some to be the father of MMA) started out studying Wing Chun kung-fu, but incorporated western fencing and wrestling techniques. Jeet kune do is about defying convention and pre-set forms and adapting to the situation; it is inclusive rather than exclusive.IMO, eastern martial-arts became watered-down when they became an alternative to soccer for the children of suburban North America. With the need to judge which students were better than others and provide some sense of accomplishment or perception of value came the introduction of belts by colour. Martial-arts like karate, tae kwan do and kung-fu became demonstration sports rather than fighting systems. Originally (and in some cases, currently) many of the eastern arts taught weapons fighting as well as unarmed fighting and I don't think it is ever considered preferable to fight an armed opponent unarmed. As far as a "...continuing emphasis in the far east on unarmed combat techniques, improvised weapons, melee combat techniques...", I'd say that is a trend worldwide rather than just in the east and is far more practical than you make it sound. Combat systems are developed to assist the individual when they are in the desperate situation of being unarmed. They are developed and used by police and military forces all over the world to compliment their weapons training (Israeli Krav-maga being a good example) and can certainly be adapted for a private citizen's self-defense. While eastern societal and cultural aspects can certainly be credited with the proliferation of martial-arts in those regions, it does little to diminish their effectiveness when they are applied properly. To sum up, fighting systems are developed based on need and vary greatly by their intended function. Most can be effective when used properly and it is difficult to claim any one system as superior. Ultimately, it depends largely upon the practitioner, the skills and physique of their opponent and the circumstances of the fight. Any "west vs east" comparison is largely nonsense as far as I'm concerned.</blockquote>

Verification