9 ms·

The reality is that most "martial arts" are mostly performative, as the principles of actually useful hand to hand combat are fairly universal and anything that

by roel_v 5y ago

The reality is that most "martial arts" are mostly performative, as the principles of actually useful hand to hand combat are fairly universal and anything that isn't effective and efficient "evolves" out quickly. E.g. wildly flaying weapons, static Bruce Lee style kicking/punching only h2h fighting styles, etc. - spectacular for movies and demonstrations, but little use in actual fighting. So anything that's "lost" is just as easily replaced by someone else coming up with another ritualized choreography. Take aikido. Why are there so many people doing that? It's not because it has anything to do with actual fighting. It's like why panda bears are still alive - if it were to be left to nature, they'd die out soon, the main reason we have so many is because they look cute to humans and we protect and encourage their existence.

BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago
Your last paragraph was incredibly funny! Pandas exist not because they have evolved in their ecological niche for millions of years, but because they are human pets? I assume a bit like toy poodles?
watwut 5y ago
Bruce Lee thing was specifically designed for movies, so I dont think it is good example of traditional martial arts that might or might not be lost. It was modern adaptation literally for movie. Aikido is done a lot now, becauae it adapted to current world. What people do is modern variant where not useful pieces got removed and useful pieces are pushed up. Useful here being fun engaging exercise - and in our world being sedentary is more of risk then having to go on the offensive against ennemy clan.
- roel_v 5y ago
  Right, and there is nothing wrong with spectacular fighting for movies, but it did give rise to the idea that this is what actual fighting looks like. Which it doesn't. Same with aikido - it's fine when people do it as a form of exercise, like lots of Chinese do tai chi, but let's not kid ourselves on the efficacy. I used to train at a place where there was an aikido group before us, and the teacher would always be talking about "do this or that because of this specific thing the samurai did on the battlefield". I wasn't going to be That Guy challenging him in front of his students, but please - you're literally standing there in what actual samurai wore as underwear under their plate armor when going to war, and now you're going to claim that they used some hand-wavy wrist lock to disarm another guy in full armor charging them with a 3 foot sword? To each their own, but at least be honest to yourself and your students. And it's usually these people who have the most self-aggrandazing ideas about "bushido" and how their hocus pocus is somehow morally superior. How are straight up lies and deceit morally superior? (I know you weren't claiming my last point, I'm just saying that those promoting their fight-like dance choreographies as "martial arts" need to be honest to be able to claim the moral high ground.)
  - skhr0680 5y ago
    Aikido has a lot of woo, especially from “true believers”. Putting that aside, it is pretty similar to meditation. It’s not really physically taxing, the movements are intuitive, and it isn’t competitive, so your main opponent is your own mind and heart. It’s a realization that can help you out a lot in other sports or life in general. One of the most physically gifted athletes I grew up with was fitter and could train harder than anyone I knew, but never amounted to anything in sports, combat or otherwise, because he always completely lost his cool under pressure. Maybe Aikido would have helped him out if he had thought to try it.
cowanon22 5y ago
Yes, most martial arts are more of cultural dance and ceremony than an actual effective fighting techniques. MMA/UFC has done more to advance the state of the art than a 1000 years of dojos ever did. From a cultural standpoint it's a shame that this martial art is lost, but I would be surprised if it had anything novel that would translate to real combat.
- austinjp 5y ago
  Well, MMA is a one-on-one sport, with all that entails. No multiple opponents, no small joint manipulation, no gouging, no biting, no spitting, no striking the neck or back of the head, no kicking the head of a downed opponent.... etc etc. All of which could happen in actual combat and non-sport fighting.
  - simonh 5y ago
    There was a famous Greek fighter who competed in the original Olympics who's preferred tactic was to break all the fingers of his opponent first, before finishing them off. It was pretty normal for fighters to lose teeth or suffer broken bones.
    - MaxBarraclough 5y ago
      This guy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sostratus_of_Sicyon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sostratus_of_Sicyon
      - simonh 5y ago
        Go Sostratus!
  - danenania 5y ago
    Apart from multiple opponents, those all seem like fairly minor variations on MMA technique in the sense that defending against the legal MMA attacks naturally defends against the illegal ones as well, and similarly the same skills that allow a fighter to land legal attacks would allow them to land illegal ones in a non-sport situation. It seems unlikely an overall inferior MMA fighter could win just by focusing on specific illegal moves. For multiple opponents, I could certainly see that changing the optimal strategy, but it seems like the odds of winning would still mainly be a function of how strong a fighter is one-on-one, since the only hope is to quickly neutralize the additional opponent(s).
VortexDream 5y ago
Sorry, Bruce Lee and static? What are you even talking about? He's one of the earliest examples of MMA I can think of in how he tried to draw from different martial arts to create jeet kune do, which was not just created for movies. Edit: As a concrete example, he grew up with Wing Chun. But he realized that the static stance was a huge detriment in real fights, so he took the boxing footwork from Ali, which was a lot of moving around and staying mobile and not standing in one spot.
- roel_v 5y ago
  "Bruce Lee's movie fighting style" then, which has little to do with his proper fight training, like Jean Claude van Damme's fight choreography has little to do with his fighting background. Apart from that, I do take issue with the for some reason increasingly popular notion of Bruce Lee's fighthing being some sort of proto-MMA. MMA is not just taking something from various sources and calling it "<first name>-fu" or "<first name> tang doo". The essence of (old school) MMA/Vale Tudo is about finding out what works and what doesn't through literal trial by combat, it's not about the mix and match aspect.
  - dhimes 5y ago
    That essence is what Bruce Lee espoused as well, from what I've read. Apparently that's what got him into trouble with the traditional "elder" practitioners.
  - VortexDream 5y ago
    So, exactly what Bruce Lee did. Read his books. He talks about how he was disappointed with traditional martial arts and how he was always interested in finding the most effective techniques and ideas. I honestly don't understand why you're so eager to criticize what he did when you don't seem to know much about what he actually did and what his thoughts were about martial arts.
    - roel_v 5y ago
      Please show me the full contact fights Bruce Lee was in.
mrmuagi 5y ago
> Take aikido. Why are there so many people doing that? I blame Steven Seagal here.

by roel_v 5y ago

BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago

Your last paragraph was incredibly funny! Pandas exist not because they have evolved in their ecological niche for millions of years, but because they are human pets? I assume a bit like toy poodles?

watwut 5y ago

Bruce Lee thing was specifically designed for movies, so I dont think it is good example of traditional martial arts that might or might not be lost. It was modern adaptation literally for movie. Aikido is done a lot now, becauae it adapted to current world. What people do is modern variant where not useful pieces got removed and useful pieces are pushed up. Useful here being fun engaging exercise - and in our world being sedentary is more of risk then having to go on the offensive against ennemy clan.

roel_v 5y ago
Right, and there is nothing wrong with spectacular fighting for movies, but it did give rise to the idea that this is what actual fighting looks like. Which it doesn't. Same with aikido - it's fine when people do it as a form of exercise, like lots of Chinese do tai chi, but let's not kid ourselves on the efficacy. I used to train at a place where there was an aikido group before us, and the teacher would always be talking about "do this or that because of this specific thing the samurai did on the battlefield". I wasn't going to be That Guy challenging him in front of his students, but please - you're literally standing there in what actual samurai wore as underwear under their plate armor when going to war, and now you're going to claim that they used some hand-wavy wrist lock to disarm another guy in full armor charging them with a 3 foot sword? To each their own, but at least be honest to yourself and your students. And it's usually these people who have the most self-aggrandazing ideas about "bushido" and how their hocus pocus is somehow morally superior. How are straight up lies and deceit morally superior? (I know you weren't claiming my last point, I'm just saying that those promoting their fight-like dance choreographies as "martial arts" need to be honest to be able to claim the moral high ground.)
- skhr0680 5y ago
  Aikido has a lot of woo, especially from “true believers”. Putting that aside, it is pretty similar to meditation. It’s not really physically taxing, the movements are intuitive, and it isn’t competitive, so your main opponent is your own mind and heart. It’s a realization that can help you out a lot in other sports or life in general. One of the most physically gifted athletes I grew up with was fitter and could train harder than anyone I knew, but never amounted to anything in sports, combat or otherwise, because he always completely lost his cool under pressure. Maybe Aikido would have helped him out if he had thought to try it.

cowanon22 5y ago

Yes, most martial arts are more of cultural dance and ceremony than an actual effective fighting techniques. MMA/UFC has done more to advance the state of the art than a 1000 years of dojos ever did. From a cultural standpoint it's a shame that this martial art is lost, but I would be surprised if it had anything novel that would translate to real combat.

austinjp 5y ago
Well, MMA is a one-on-one sport, with all that entails. No multiple opponents, no small joint manipulation, no gouging, no biting, no spitting, no striking the neck or back of the head, no kicking the head of a downed opponent.... etc etc. All of which could happen in actual combat and non-sport fighting.
- simonh 5y ago
  There was a famous Greek fighter who competed in the original Olympics who's preferred tactic was to break all the fingers of his opponent first, before finishing them off. It was pretty normal for fighters to lose teeth or suffer broken bones.
  - MaxBarraclough 5y ago
    This guy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sostratus_of_Sicyon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sostratus_of_Sicyon
    - simonh 5y ago
      Go Sostratus!
- danenania 5y ago
  Apart from multiple opponents, those all seem like fairly minor variations on MMA technique in the sense that defending against the legal MMA attacks naturally defends against the illegal ones as well, and similarly the same skills that allow a fighter to land legal attacks would allow them to land illegal ones in a non-sport situation. It seems unlikely an overall inferior MMA fighter could win just by focusing on specific illegal moves. For multiple opponents, I could certainly see that changing the optimal strategy, but it seems like the odds of winning would still mainly be a function of how strong a fighter is one-on-one, since the only hope is to quickly neutralize the additional opponent(s).

VortexDream 5y ago

Sorry, Bruce Lee and static? What are you even talking about? He's one of the earliest examples of MMA I can think of in how he tried to draw from different martial arts to create jeet kune do, which was not just created for movies. Edit: As a concrete example, he grew up with Wing Chun. But he realized that the static stance was a huge detriment in real fights, so he took the boxing footwork from Ali, which was a lot of moving around and staying mobile and not standing in one spot.

roel_v 5y ago
"Bruce Lee's movie fighting style" then, which has little to do with his proper fight training, like Jean Claude van Damme's fight choreography has little to do with his fighting background. Apart from that, I do take issue with the for some reason increasingly popular notion of Bruce Lee's fighthing being some sort of proto-MMA. MMA is not just taking something from various sources and calling it "<first name>-fu" or "<first name> tang doo". The essence of (old school) MMA/Vale Tudo is about finding out what works and what doesn't through literal trial by combat, it's not about the mix and match aspect.
- dhimes 5y ago
  That essence is what Bruce Lee espoused as well, from what I've read. Apparently that's what got him into trouble with the traditional "elder" practitioners.
- VortexDream 5y ago
  So, exactly what Bruce Lee did. Read his books. He talks about how he was disappointed with traditional martial arts and how he was always interested in finding the most effective techniques and ideas. I honestly don't understand why you're so eager to criticize what he did when you don't seem to know much about what he actually did and what his thoughts were about martial arts.
  - roel_v 5y ago
    Please show me the full contact fights Bruce Lee was in.

mrmuagi 5y ago

> Take aikido. Why are there so many people doing that? I blame Steven Seagal here.