Okay epic old school osmium rant in progress.

tl;dr at the end

I'm going to touch on a couple of the major martial arts points people have made here some 2nd hand experiences etc that I think are relevant to the discussion at hand.

Martial arts have a focus. Karate was hands vs swords. You needed to knock the sword away long enough to get in and drop them. One punch, if you didn't land it perfect with maximal power you were toast because that blade was coming back and you probably already sacrificed the blocking hand. So what does a style with that as its roots provide. Mid range power, general with hand techniques (hard to control the opponent's sword at a distance). How do you apply that best? look at the situation and read your opponent, find an opening and use exactly as much time as they give you to deliver maximal power. You'll notice with Karate (and many "traditional" martial arts) that there is a counter rotation caused by additionally pulling back the non-punching hand. If they give you a small opening, use a jab, don't bother with the pull back, or do something fancy from a hand that just blocked like a back fist or something. If they commit their weight after they do a fake punch, two kicks off the same leg combo, charge in and give it maximal power.

Does that focus necessarily make karate ineffective against an armed opponent? Or at a disadvantage vs a grapple? Or impotent when fighting multiple opponents? No it just changes the game. If someone tries to get in on you your objective is either to prevent that (get back push him back with a kick etc) or to cause significant damage as he comes in (knee to the chin, drop down elbow to clavicle, dropping elbow to the head / neck etc, strike to the temple etc). Sure you are in trouble if they get to you, but they have to get to you in one piece. Also, a lot of grappling styles seem to ignore that someone might just try to poke your eyes out or use your eye sockets as leverage on your head, bite, break joints etc. (I'm looking at you wrestling / competition jiujutsu).

On to some stories. Taekwondo is often looked down on for not knowing what to do if they get in close or catch a kick. The real issue is that many people that practice taekwondo focus exclusively on sparring for tournaments (which are more or less good approximations of real combat depending on the rules, but they are only approximations) and so they don't focus on how to deal with what other styles might do. A friend of mine was sparring some apparently famous taekwondo guy back when he was younger (he won the US national tournament for one of the branches in the early 80s I could probably look those winners up and try to take a stab at finding him but it's really not that cogent)... so my friend manged to step in and catch a kick and thought he was stepping in for a nice reaping throw and his opponent instead jumped, and landed a heel kick to his temple with the leg he was standing on. My friend was impressed when he finally woke up.

My point here is that knowing your style (whether it's pure or just the bits and pieces from the various styles you've learned over the years that work for you (in your current body, we all age many lose flexibility)), and knowing what it is good at and not good at, how to hedge against your limitations in training and capability as well as where and when they shine brightly are what make you effective. Being able to read your opponent better than they read you and making solid tactical decisions based on the situation are key to being effective. All styles will have limitations (some like say boxing will be more severe than others, like say hapkido and all of the newer "complete" martial arts (that cross train in weapons, hard style strikes, soft style joint manipulation, throws, grappling etc))...


On to styles of training.
Many traditional styles have a very round-about method of training (wax on wax off movie go-ers?). You do basics and learn the mechanics for your hands, then you do it moving. Then you do it moving in different directions (kata). Then you do it with partners where you know what's happening when (for instance attacker attacks 3 times with a mid level punch... complication would be changing the attack pattern). Then you might do it without knowing, but one side attacks one side defends. Then you might do "fake" sparring where you each take turns and go slow. Then you might do full on sparring... finally with multiple opponents. You can't say that kata serves no purpose merely because it isn't directly fighting. If you just learn by doing you learn wrong. You build in mistakes and tells and inefficiencies. This is the limitation of the vaunted fighting systems like krav maga. They're great, but they're main utility is in that they are very flexible and each practitioner learns what works for them (which the utility of which cannot be understated, it is very rare that one person is *actually* good at all aspects of a given martial art). The downside is that they don't take long to figure out, and versus a well trained opponent that lack of versatility is detrimental.

To continue the main obstacle to applicability traditional styles have is that they use complicated techniques that take years to hone and even then in adrenaline pumped situations you're likely to mess the most complicated of them up. (this is where fighting systems really shine, hence why they're used in militaries you need to be effective the first time you are in combat, you don't just want to survivors to be good, you want them to be good before they need to survive). That being said often the only part that is lacking in tournament focused styles is this last step of applying the techniques (which I make seem easier than it really is in that statement).

Another way to explain the above sort of stream on consciousness list of practice techniques... I'll specify karate's because I am familiar and I think people have probably seen (hopefully) the original karate kid, or have at least seen something with the rows upon rows of endless students punching in time. You start with the arms separate from all else, perhaps in a horse stand, perhaps in a front stance. This forces you to focus on the fist traveling straight to the target, on hitting with your knuckles and hand bones aligning with your arm, shoulders down, not leaning forward/back or side/side. Then perhaps you include moving forward or backward. You need to time the fist with the feet, if you punch without your feet on the ground you have no way to a) use your bigger muscle groups in the core / legs and b) nothing to push off of / nowhere to support the counter force of your strike. Then you do kata, where you introduce spinning, i.e. changing directions. Look first, decide to step, step, rotate, then perform a technique ( such as the punch). Then you add an opponent, first it's just I punch you block. Blocker learning timing, reading the opponent to see what he's going to do. Attacker gets distance and learns to see how a defender defends and perhaps finds openings in their defense for further attack. No you might add in a counter, i.e. attack 3 times then the defender finds an opening to counter attack in. Then perhaps you might do the same thing with free form attacks, or you might just do a single attack anywhere and they block and counter. (more reading training / quick response training i.e. don't over think it, react). There is also pad work where you learn how applying power actually feels (you can't really appreciate a roundhouse kick until you actually try to plant one solidly, kicking air is almost worthless for this kick for training on the power as you generate so much rotational inertia if really committing that you can't really expect to stop your own leg. (which maybe you don't want to always do, but if you know the opponent can't get out of the way maybe it's the right call) Finally there is sparring where you fluidly try to find openings and hit them. now for many styles this sparring is riddles with rules. The main one I dislike about karate is the above the belt rule. For me however it is good practice as in other styles I've taken I *never* kick above the belt, I read the opponent wait for them to kick or commit on the front side, block or dodge and then charge low taking out the *back* knee (people feel like it's just so unassailable it usually turns out to be an easy target if you can time well and go fast... which it turns out are (currently) my two main strengths in fighting). So it's sorta like training your "left" leg or "left" hand it gives you more flexibility (say in soccer, it's better to use whatever foot is available, not have to use only one specific foot).


On to weapons.
In close knives are scary. Slashing, stabbing, whatever they suck. I trained in a philipino style which is related to eskrima that the philipino military uses. The objective is to physically disable the opponents body. The standard knife techniques are to soft block an incoming strike, cut through the tendons of the arm come back and cut through the bottom attachment point for the bicep and continue on toward the neck (which at that point is just going to be gravy that arm is worthless and as they attacked with it it very well might have held their weapon)... or you can bypass the bicep stab in towards the lung through the floating ribs and disengage. And that's just one of dozens of techniques they use. Militaries have variations on those to disarm and disable the weapon hand... to injure a or kill a target and keep them quiet while doing it etc. Weapons totally change the dynamic and if you haven't played with them before it's going to be dangerous


Sparring
in my experience the biggest risk in sparring and fighting is not knowing your opponents style (i.e. not being able to read them). If you've never seen a drunken boxer, or seen some of those animalistic kung fu styles you're unlikely to be able to gauge what you opponent is doing or might do. A lot of chinese styles do a *very* good job here with just an absolute torrent of techniques and weird weapons with distraction built into them (chain swords, rapiers with red ribbons and little lead weights, meteor hammers and all sorts of inexplicable rope and blade type weapons). If you think your opponent is going to hit you in the face but then you feel them stab you in the shin that distraction where you don't expect it ends the fight because while you're confused they land their killer blow... similar things could be something as simple as stepping on their toe, if they don't notice it and try to step back (but can't) that is a great moment to attack in.

Loroi styles. The one thing I've noticed in all the styles I've taken is that there always seem to be pairs, of decisions, of ways to get at a technique or pairs of techniques that work well together (for instance if you try that standard elbow lock standing that everyone learns like their first day in any soft style it pairs nicely with a figure 4 ish + major reaping throw sort of thing as what you do to oppose one of the pair leads right into the other). The pair that I think will show up over and over in loroi styles will be the disengage or stay engaged. I'll elaborate.

There are two axes to a loroi on loroi combat. The mental half (can you touch you opponent and win via some mental will wrestling) and the physical half (can you make them physically incapable of harming you further). To that end I think the Loroi "sizing up your opponent" is going to involve some clashes wherein the opponents attempt to discern if their opponent is stronger than them mentally, if they deal well (mentally) with physical distractions as well as the normal do they have better range than me, what of their techniques are faster/slower than which of mine. (sometimes a big opponent has a relatively fast kick for their size but really slow arms etc etc).

I see Loroi-fu being a blend of the many styles that are collectively called kung-fu (for their awesome misdirection and very unexpected attack angles), things like judo / jiujutsu / aikido / anything soft and joint manipulationy for the ability to force an enemy away from you, or to disable their limbs quickly as well as high power styles (that overlap with above kung-fus) such as taewkondo or karate (or really anything korean they all usually have similar footwork / kicks and differ mainly in the application thereof).

I see the striking styles & judo+++ as being what people who are mentally weaker will attempt to use(or vs opponents that seem very mentally grounded who can't be shaken by physical abuse).

I think if they're closely matched you might see some muy thai, jiututsu sort of grabbing and joints and close in stuff (perhaps to try and gain mental tactical advantage by distracting the attacker).

If they have the mental advantage I think you'd see joint manipulation, submissions, grappling etc to try to maintain physical contact and limit the capability of the opponent to damage you physically while you attack mentally from the skin contact.

I think all of these techniques that would resemble some of that plethora of styles I mentioned would work in pairs or have options, they would be techniques where you could attempt to engage and stay in contact, where you could try to do maximal damage in minimal time (while risking contact i.e. distract mentally and finish physically) or where you could avoid the grab and strike. For instance an outside block you can just block and then backfist with that hand you blocked with and reverse punch kick or something. Or you can do that outside block and lead the attacking hand into your rear hand at which point you could step in and elbow them and then throw them... or you could grab that hand and take the elbow joint lock do the break or try to take them to the ground with it. Or as you come in with the elbow you might stomp on their foot, send a mental pulse attack through the hand as you hit them with the elbow.

Now TK combat will be *very* different. Someone like fireblade could maybe just trip a couple hundred people in front of her at a distance, crush one person or lob enough shuriken / arrows / rocks to blot out the sky at rail gun velocities. Someone with more control but less power might to TK assisted cartwheels to get out of otherwise impossible to escape joint locks, or throw people by "pushing" their heels just as they're going to land. Or if we want to get all nerdy game breaky, just squish their opponents eyeballs and ear drums, or pinch their carotid arteries shut. TK at many power levels is going to be a "weapon" on crack. TK in close quarters combat is going to be as much an advantage vs anyone as fighting an untrained opponent in close quarters while you wield a sharp knife and know how to use it. Now of course a la jedi their powers can and will break down vs a large number of well armed, knowledgeable and determined opponents (snipers anyone?), but that doesn't actually reduce their utility it just enforces their need to not act alone.


I know I'll have stirred the pot a bunch, not sure when I'll get back in here to catch up on the results.

tl;dr. No one style is better than another, it really depends on how well the practitioner knows their style/s what it does well and what it does not do well. You can often utilize a style(or weapon) in unexpected ways (say elbowing someone's punch, or cutting their arms rather than their torso).

Fighting systems are usually designed to make you not have to think and be somewhat effective while under the effect of your first real adrenaline rush (i.e. your first deployment). What they lack is the depth of techniques that martial arts provide.

different styles have different focuses, that doesn't make them inherently ineffective. Similarly styles have a number of teaching methodologies to try to make you learn it right, so you can apply it right... usually by reducing the number of variables so you can focus on one thing at a time (such as range and timing, technique of the arms, technique of the legs / body / posture, application, targeting etc).

Most of fighting is gauging an opponent, finding their weakness, telegraphs (i,e, blink right before a punch, shift gaze towards target, grip hand tightly in anticipation, cock fist back etc) and tendencies (oh he seems to throw 3 techniques and if I get out of the way and the last technique is a kick he goes low... or he bobs left if I fake right) and learning how to apply what you know to take advantage of it.... similarly knowing what your style/ game's disadvantage is and knowing how to minimize it or how to counter the attacks someone might use on those openings. (and this doesn't even *begin* to touch on faking, or understanding what your tells / telegraphs are and mimicing them... or how you decide when you should decide you need to change things up to prevent them from getting a read on you etc).

-O

Source?

My thoughts on karate vs modern combat sports...

Bare knuckle boxing was very different from modern sport boxing. Punching someone in the head is a good way to break your hands, so bare knuckle boxers used techniques such as palm strikes, hammerfists, backfists, forearm strikes, etc. They also used the current array of punches, but mostly directed at the body which is a softer target. The main target was the solar plexus, not the head. Bare knuckle punches do more damage to muscles, so the stance was different as well. They had a deep sideways stance, with their hands held at chest level to protect the solar plexus.

As a karateka, does any of this sound in any way familiar to you?



That might work against an untrained tackle, but not a trained wrestler. With the momentum they put into it, they'll get you down even if they're momentarily unconscious.

The easiest and most effective way to stop a tackle is what wrestlers do: sprawl. If you do it quickly and well, the wrestler has to back off to avoid ending up face down under you, which is NOT where he wants to be. He'll try again, but every time he does you can punch him, kick him, make him pay for it. The resulting style is known as "sprawl and brawl" and once strikers got good at it, wrestlers had to cross-train striking to put the odds in their favor again.



Accidental eye pokes and broken toes are not uncommon in grappling practice and competition. They're not fight-enders, and bites aren't either.

A joint lock can easily turn into a broken joint if you don't tap out. Breaking major joints like shoulders, elbows, wrists, knees and ankles does end fights, and that's exactly what grappling arts like jiujitsu and catch wrestling focus on. The problem with all such techniques is getting the opponent to stay still while you do them, and that's easier to do when you have him pinned on the ground, hence all the grappling.



More often for not knowing how to take a punch, due to lack of full contact sparring.



That's why some people do casual MMA, sparring against a variety of styles so you know what to expect.



Yes! This is what TKD is supposed to look like. Too bad that's not how most schools teach it.



I agree with all of this.



I agree here. Even wrestlers, who mostly learn by doing, practice techniques separately from live sparring/grappling, for the very reasons you mention. Boxers do shadow boxing.

The main problem with full contact sparring is that it has physical limitations. You can only take so many punches, so many falls, so many bent joints in a day. Not to mention what to do when you have injuries that make such training impossible. When you've had your fill of full contact training, katas and compliant training lets you continue practicing techniques and counters when you otherwise would have to stop. This is less of a problem for throws and grappling, but it's not uncommon for injured judoka to train aikido while waiting for an injury to heal.




I disagree here. The main utility of a "complete" system is that it covers the basic defenses against a variety of common attacks. Nowadays many schools of competitive martial arts also offer a weekly MMA class to integrate those defenses into their student's style.

The main weakness is that you don't learn any one area of combat in depth, so you should look elsewhere to push what works for you to the limit. So if punches work best for you, train boxing for punches, and MMA (or krav maga) for defense against all that other stuff.



IMO the main problem is most TMA schools only do kata or point sparring, and air doesn't fight back. Once you've been punched in the face, kicked, tackled, thrown, and caught in all kinds of nasty chokes and joint locks, there just aren't that many surprises left. Students of traditional styles that do full contact training, whether they do it in their own school or get it elsewhere, do just as well as students of combat sports, and sometimes better if their techniques are more refined.



I'm not sure I understand this. What do you mean by "tournament focused styles"?



Yeah I've seen all 4 karate kid movies, and tried a few months of karate but it wasn't for me.

I get what you're saying about progression of training, the same is true of most combat sports for safety reasons. Most boxing coaches won't let you spar until you've trained the basics for a least a month, so you don't get demolished. In judo they start with breakfalls, pins and escapes, and the safest throws to fall for not necessarily the easiest to do. Joint locks and sacrifice throws are kept for later, even though they're not hard to apply, to avoid newbies injuring each other.



Even if you have, I would guess it's still going to be dangerous.



No, that would be the second biggest. The biggest risk is using flashy techniques that make you vulnerable without getting anything done.

see Capoeira vs Boxing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g5t0s_Fn9s




YES! This makes a lot of sense to me. The stronger telepath will want to maintain contact, whereas the weaker telepath will want to keep it to a minimum.



That makes total sense. Judo is great for getting people off of you. Standing locks are easily avoided, but doing so can cramp an opponent's style in the grip fighting phase, thus delaying an unwanted clinch. Punches and kicks are the best way to damage someone with minimal contact.

Sanshou uses punches, kicks, and throws from shuai jiao which are similar to judo (they're related via sumo), and some standing locks and chokes, all in a full contact format. I plan to train it so I can learn to apply my judo throws vs punches and kicks, as well as set up throws using strikes.



Again mostly makes sense, a knee to the face can be very distracting. Throws work very well from the clinch as well, especially if you can get your opponent off balance.



For a loroi with strong "brute force" type mental abilities, something like wrestling should suffice except against much larger (possibly alien) opponents. Clinch, takedown, and pin them while you rip their mind apart. It would be the loroi equivalent of "ground and pound".

Those with more finesse could grapple on the ground using subtle mental skill and the threat of submissions to stall for time both physically and mentally, hoping to tire your overwhelming opponent enough to eventually gain the upper hand. In short, BJJ with telepathy mixed in.



I wonder why strong TK didn't become more common among the loroi in their primitive warlike past, give how much of an advantage it would be. Maybe there's a evolutionary tradeoff in terms of lifespan or something? The candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long?



Yup, they mostly stick to the basics that can be taught in a short time.



Yes.



Forcing your opponent to play by your rules. A kickboxer wants to strike, and a BJJer wants to grapple. Wrestlers are good at choosing where the fight will happen, but not so good at fighting in any one range.

Don't forget that an attack may not be as effective as expected. Karate and kung fu fighters are often surprised at a boxer's ability to take punches and keep on fighting. Many a wrestler in MMA has taken a few punches right in the face, and still managed to tackle their opponent and win the fight on the ground.

It's important to know how to escape from a big sweaty man wearing nothing but speedos, intent on "mounting" you.

Bump for info on whether or not Loroi Psi-shields can block sonic damage, I've read through Gurps that psi-shields can block acidic attacks via highly corrosive liquids.

Loroi psi shields, how do you grab or block something you cannot see?

I imagine you COULD if fore-warned, like how fireblade can trap a bubble of air around her in open space, but a generic permanent shield would need to be transparent to air to ensure you can hear what is going on outside of it, if you harden it then you cannot hear, but it has a good chance to block sonic attacks, after all: if you can hear, it obviously isn't stopping sound.

Exactly, and if psi-shields are permeable to oxygen to allow for the user to breathe that would make attacks via gasses a viable option, especially if the Loroi nervous system is as "open" as Arioch has previously mentioned. I would imagine that a Loroi squad would be particularly susceptible to attacks from either the categories of sonic or gas weaponry.

Don't forget that the sonic chaos uses are not just sonic but probably have warp sorcery in them as well to make even more destructive and to attack all the senses. As the children prefer. Also the psishield can be just as susceptible to sonic attacks.

Either it create a bubble of vacuum which just exists. Or it has actual physical boundaries. in which case sonic weapons can probably go against it as well.

Yes exactly, then how does an unsheathed hear/see/breath if their psi-shields are up?

its their noting these "imprirational" black boxes of word can know ? oh course its a wizards ( or warlock, or mage or other magical user).

getting back on poin, but even if Ps-sheilds allow gases throught couldn't the attacked loroi just pushed the gases away ( like with a wind blast)?

Indeed their power is unbound, truly is it said "He who controls the demotivators, controls the universe!".

I would think that controlling the wind would be require a high level of control or specific training on behalf of the psi. Also by the time you notice your breathing a weaponized nerve gas it's usually too late to activate the fan. From the information Arioch has provided us Psi requires a high level of concentration to be control their abilities; which would be hard to summon up when your choking your lunch out on the floor, writhing in agony. It doesn't even have to be lethal, distracting and disabling attacks such as those used to quell riots (i.e. Reeking gas, strobing lights, sonic assaults) would render a psi unable to concentrate or focus and thus far less of a lethal threat.

Okay digging through responses clarifying etc as usual.


The political centralization of Okinawa by King Shō Hashi in 1429 and the policy of banning weapons, enforced in Okinawa after the invasion of the Shimazu clan in 1609, are also factors that furthered the development of unarmed combat techniques in Okinawa.[2]
you can find many but that link from wiki once worked. It's fairly common knowledge that karate is mostly a derivative of chinese styles with alterations that developed a lot of its character from it's time stewing in Okinawa. Karate was at that time the self defense method for the king's guards and people in similar lines of work as a necessity of not having weapons. Much of it's character such as the opposite hand from the striking hand is pulled back (leaving the attacker open at the moment of attack), is thought to be a by-product of the fact that you're usually using this style vs someone with a single weapon drawn (spear/yari sword/katana) hence the use of lots of power on a block, huge distance covering and a full power strike off the other hand. You do not have the distance advantage even with legs vs a weapon. Leg wounds are deadly and effect mobility, while arm wounds are not nearly so bad. It's a good analog for how a smaller person fights a taller person. If their arms reach you at your kicking range you only option is to close the gap, not only is this simply because you can't kick them when they can kick you but you need to close the gap to have the same number of weapons available (i.e. both arms both legs).

another "royal" style would be tang soo do which I think was the one taught to the royal families in korea.


some reading for you
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wad%C5%8D-ry%C5%AB
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotokan
These are two splinter styles of karate (that I've actually taken heh) They have exactly the same techniques but very very different ideas on how to apply them.
It is very true that the punch is actually one of the hardest strikes (I'd say finger strikes are the hardest) to do safely and actually injure an opponent. (side note I'm partial to the limp wrist strike as it's nearly impossible to screw up and super fun / satisfying and not many styles use it)

You'll notice that things often start to look very similar for styles that fight at similar ranges. Of course there will be differences. The main one I would point out is that karate focuses (depending on style so usually) on one strike. So you train very heavily on landing one good strike and on covering that gap, running down the opponent (as they might step back or block). That is a different focus than being forced in a ring and basically having to sit there and deal. Depending on your point of view that is either a very big difference or a minor stylistic difference. I'm more toward the big difference camp, but it also really depends on your mentality and how you apply what you've trained that determines your actual efficacy.



It always depends on who reads the opponent better. If you read that your opponent is going in for a grab a good strike is a very good deterrent if not a fight ender. Also just another aside all of those "ground and point" "strike and brawl" and other UFC variants of "fighting styles" while fun and interesting and certainly a good way to represent how different styles actually work (i.e. you need to maximize your advantages and limit their's)... remember that they disallow most of what makes striking styles good at what they do (similarly for joint manipulation). For instance if you're not allowed to trap a punch and just break the joint, or gouge the eyes, or kick the knee you don't have to stay in a "stance" that defends against those attacks. A very striking example of something similar is taekwondo. If you've ever done point sparring it's crazy easy to just step in and jab to the face (if you can get the chance between the flurries of kicks) because many of them leave their hands very low.

Back to the tackle, if a guy tackles me... even if I don't see it coming I can burst both of his ear drums before I hit the ground. If I see it coming (and he does a bad job) I could throw him. Sprawling is always a good tactic, it's the most basic defense against the leg take downs. What you need to do to get a clean takedown is catch the person when they can't move that leg (for instance they just put a bunch of weight on it after a kick or something). If you can't read the opponent better than they read you then they can counter somehow. I guarantee you that a solid knee to the head will end the fight if not the life of the tackler, so it is a valid counter. That doesn't mean it's always going to work, it also doesn't negate the fact that if you are fighting with "pure" karate or most traditional styles you're going to be in trouble if they can get in and play with your center of mass (throws, tackles, large joint manipulations like elbow locks etc).

However, I feel like a lot of people don't appreciate that you can fight well with almost any style and the way to be effective is to know other styles so you can see what might be coming read your opponents movements and utilize something to counter it. A great example can be taken from martial arts masters. They'll usually start fighting "like an old man" at some point, getting in close, leaning on the opponent, using techniques from tai chi where you use the movement of your opponents body by touch (rather than seeing the movement with your eye) and going with the flow so to speak. They use fancy terms like qigong and internal energy and call it an internal style (which lot's of people think it means you can move people at a distance or whatever). If you ignore the spiritual component and look at how tai chi funcgtions it's basically how to use your body mass and your center of power (i.e. your core muscles) to utilize techniques. (I've heard the story that the slow practice was a way to train for war as peasants without looking like you were. It only takes one or two simple moves to turn much of what americans see as tai chi into a martial art, but I digress) What I mean to say is that that old martial arts master would have fought very differently when he had a younger body. But in both physical incarnations he could probably still take me apart as I am now... he would just do it differently.


On the eye gouges I will heavily disagree, if you can manage to get a finger into an opponent's eye that fight is in all likelihood over. (Accidental is a different ball of wax) They are blind in that eye (as you've just popped it or at least heavily scratched the corea). And they hurt like hell, it's significantly more jarring that just a jab to the face. Best case it's not scratched but it's tearing up like heck and probably closed or nearly impossible to open for a solid few seconds. meanwhile you need to fight without peripheral vision on one side or depth perception... that's a pretty hefty handicap

It depends on the other injuries where the fight is going to end up. If both parties are stand up striking types a broken toe can be a big deal as it can effect mobility.

Another point joint locks don't require much time if you do them right a mere moment and that is a compound fracture. The myth that joint locks take time (or are nearly impossible to actually get in combat) are the soft style's misrepresentation (much like using the opposite hand is for karate, or dropping the hands is for taekwondo). It is because that is how you have to practice it in order to train (and how you would have to "spar" in order to ever keep enough people around to continue sparring, there are enough injuries without getting more because someone misjudged how good their opponent's lock was and tried to fight it in a "full contact sparring" one would have to use to practice in a "real" manner). Much like with the grappler if you know the punch is coming because you read the opponent well you can quite possibly intercept that punch (or heck just grab their guard) and do something soft style-ish that might involve broken joints. If they see if coming of you don't see it soon enough you probably can't grab it.


There are plenty of tournament taekwondo styles for which unless the head actually moves from the kick it doesn't count. But yes any tournament style (UFC included) will have it's own unique brand of illogical fighting styles / techniques that will develop as optimizations for the specific limitations the tournament's rules create.


I think taking the styles works better personally. Just seeing them in action is good, but really how long is it going to take you to figure out a drunken boxer's movement by just seeing it. I'm always a proponent of learning it and figuring out all the nitty gritty details and then trying to use it (and fight against it too).




my personal bet is some combination of that close knit war party and something akin to the formal dual in europe where you could designate a stand in. Both sides are likely to have strong-psi-loroi so that is a disincentive to pick on "weaker" opponents for fear of someone else in their clan.

I know the insider has some stuff on how Loroi fought between the planets with psi.

As for outright war periods, I would bet the quantity of powerful Loroi were few and they weren't often risked (think queens in chess ~_^). Also deterrent it's a lot of damage if you start down that path. Finally when you do start down that path both sides are probably going to end up with few to none powerful loroi left (as they're going to be the targets in outright war), so it'll sort of turn into no-one left to fight the war. The recharge period would be faster than in humans due to the increased population growth rate.


That is a very good way of putting it. There are some styles that focus on taking strikes in vital points (taking crotch shots, strikes to the neck etc) in order to be ready for the inevitable strike that you won't block. I took a style called taido for like 6 months a few years ago where one drill we did was basically walking face-first into a punch halfway through throwing a punch (you had a block up but still). I never got very good at taking head shots, but I do toughen my shins I've done enough roundhouse on roundhouse clashes to make that seem like a good idea .

While I'll certainly agree in the nasty realworld you might not land a good solid blow, especially in the heat of the moment against a moving and determined target, that if it is solid even that MMA guy will feel it. You just need to know where to strike ^_^. Can't toughen your ears open palm slap to the ear. Most people don't toughen their throats, spear hand is great even if they're raising their shoulders and tucking their chins. etc etc.

Still I have to say that you have what I would call a very "mature" view of martial arts, hand to hand combat etc. Usually on the interwebs you find a bunch of nutjobs that are fanatics of some style unwilling to grant that there is any weakness in that particular mindset or types of techniques (your typical took one style, got a black belt in it, never cross trained), or think that all martial arts are crap and you really need to do dog brothers or MMA to really appreciate how to apply the technique (took a karate class for a few months as a kid at a black-belt mill and has since written off martial arts in general) and fail to see the forest from their own particular tree they've climbed up.

I've had good luck with this forum separating out all the crazies .

To weigh in a little on the psi-shield. I would say it breaks down into two types. Keep a mental barrier up (protect against other psi), keep a physical barrier up (push away bad stuff as it comes your way). The nifty bit on the physical barrier is you might very well be able to read the minds of your attackers and know they're going to gas you (and hence know when to make some wind). Also if you're powerful enough you could just push everything in a 10m cube in front of you back with a ton of force or something.

-O

On the karate vs sword wielder.

Let's be very honest here. If you only know karate and the other person has a sword and at least known which side is the pointy bit, you are in a giant load of trouble and it's far better to run.

For this reason you rarely see a MA develop with a weapon against unarmed mentality first and foremost but often you see a MA add in element against weapons. The ban on weapons might have indeed allowed karate to flourish at least somewhat. But more in the idea of unarmed against unarmed.

The common truth sort of says - if you give an untrained person a knife you give him five years of training in any MA against an unarmed opponent.


And I agree on random aproaches surprising people. When I used to do jitsu I often surprised people by being very direct in sparring. You just don't expect a not too big blonde to take a punch to the face and then still hit you back and go into a grapple.

Leg wounds are only deadly if the wound is to the inner thigh, which I hope is not the part you're kicking with. Mobility is another matter, but if you're wearing jeans and a tshirt your legs are better protected than your arms or even your torso.

People kick even in knife vs knife fights. Kicking someone in the head can end the fight, and low kicks can injure a lot of stuff that affects mobility.

Savate and Pananjakman both came from knife cultures, were trained alongside blades, and put more focus on kicks than on hand strikes.




Your link says, Wado-ryu is really more of a jujutsu style focused on strikes, so I'd guess it's related to judo and aikido in a lot of its concepts. I see that its katas also include throws and joint locks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gig%C5%8D_Funakoshi#Changes_in_style

Shotokan's style was strongly influenced by kendo. Stances and footwork that make sense with weapons don't always work as well unarmed.



sprawl and brawl. The distinction is important because strikers who don't know how to sprawl get massacred by wrestlers, but those who do have a lot of good options after that.



MMA allows you to trap a punch, break the joint, kick the knee, slap the ears. Gouging the eyes and biting are fouls yet some still do it - and tend to lose the fight anyway. Wrist locks are permitted and are sometimes used to good effect by those who know them - but mostly on the ground where it's easier to control their opponent. What deadly unstoppable moves are disallowed again?



Even if it works, bursting your opponent's eardrums will only cause split-second disorientation. This is based on people who have had their eardrums burst in sparring, and fought on. If you can reliably hit him hard enough to burst his eardrums, you could just palm strike him in the face instead.



Exactly, sprawling gives you the luxury to fail at whatever counter-attack you attempt. The only alternative I've heard of is a sacrifice throw such as tomoe nage, which I'm guessing Wado Ryu trains as well?



Thank you. I've seen a lot of that as well, and I'm glad to see you don't discount combat sports (and appropriate defenses) the way a lot of TMA practitioners do. The way I see it, TMAs are for refined technique and advanced concepts, full contact combat sports are for practical experience against resistance, and the best schools are those that provide both.

i sorta disregard MMA and that stuff mostly because it is basically a defensive system, was this nice little docu-soap thingie with a few MMA guys going to a marine martial arts center, they got their ass handed to them due to lack of offensive mindedness, they did follow marine tradition though, improvise, adapt and overcome but bottom line is they got their ass handed to them when doing what they usually do, worked out pretty fine one on one, two on one and they got hammered silly, all of them.

as i said, most MMA is defensive in nature, deny opponent a win until he either gets tired and screws up or just plain makes a mistake, it looks pretty offensive unless you know what to look for, but it's usually pretty defensive.

and defensive does NOT work in a multiple threat axis environment.

Link?

Whether "MMA" is defensive depends on what style an individual MMA fighter has as a base. For half of them it's wrestling, which is definitely offensive. Muay thai is also common, and very offensive as well. BJJ is defensive by design, but it's not the primary style for the majority of MMA fighters.

As for whether defensive styles like BJJ work in a "multiple threat axis environment", from what I hear the gracies carry knives and know how to use them - BJJ is just a backup in case they get taken down.

I can't really think of any way duelling-oriented fighting training is defensive in any way, especially in MMA where you don't exactly score for pulling your punches.

The fact that someone trained in duelling is out of their element trying to fight multiple opponents is entirely unrelated.

EDIT:

I don't think I've ever seen or heard of karate having had a significant focus on unarmed vs armed fighting techniques. I'm sure there were some in the chinese and okinawan progenitors and possibly a few remain in the extant kata practiced, but it's far from being a martial art designed to fight against armed opponents.

Now aikido on the other hand most certainly has a large focus on fighting armed opponents with your bare hands. Some commentary I've run into mentions the entire yielding to an assault principle of it (or how ever they go around expressing that bit) is mainly for it's applicability against an armed opponent.

daelyte: in a one on one fight, it's usually a good idea to test the waters, jab a little to see how your opponent reacts, feel his style out. THAT is what i call defensive, to not go for a KO from the first second, in war(or in this case multiple threat axis environment) usually the biggest error you can make is 'wait and see', unless you are a sniper/scout or the enemy does not know you are there, at which point waiting to set up a proper ambush is a good idea.

but one against many melee it's all about aggressiveness, get the other guy before his buddies get you, one on one with a good opponent that often makes you lose quickly, but one against many it's the only way to go.

@discord
By your definition, neither muay thai nor wrestling seem defensive, in fact they have a reputation for being hyper-aggressive even in cases where more caution would be advised.

IMO against multiple opponents the key is to not get overwhelmed before you can get away. Footwork is important for that, and neither muay thai, wrestling or BJJ are known for their footwork.

Other arts, however:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8_zWBQXZj4


@Mikk:
The failure of duelling styles vs multiple opponents mostly in the form of staying engaged too long with one opponent, and training for multiple-opponent scenarios can help cure that.

The concept of yielding and using your opponent's force against him seems to trace back to jujutsu, and is also found in judo, bjj and a few other jujutsu-derived styles.

My experience from judo is that nearly all judoka are unable to apply ANY of their techniques in randori the first few times, no matter skilled they are with compliant partners, and many freeze up the first time in competition. I have difficulty believing that someone who has never tested their ability to fight a single unarmed opponent will somehow be badass vs multiple armed opponents, no matter what they trained.

AFAIK, shodokan and yoseikan are the only two forms of aikido (or derivative) that do randori.

daelyte: true to some degree, but it's a mental thing, a mindset, killer instinct to see an opening and not hold back just go in all guns blazing so to speak....and if you do not see an opening just bull your way through, it's ugly, you will probably get hurt but you just might 'survive'.

Keep in mind that duelers have another important thing going in a sense against them. If you duel, you usually duel against people with similar abilities. You have a certain comfort zone and if the people are good they'll actually put down minor traps.

Those soldiers can be one on one a lot worse. But they're sort of trained to bull trough no matter what. So they do stuff a very good fighter wouldn't and do it fast.

Okay been out a while. Few random points not going to bother quoting.

1) There are a bunch of useful things that UFC and other MMA styles ban.
a few off the UFC website:
Grabbing the clavicle
Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea
Eye gouging of any kind
Stomping a grounded opponent
Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent
Striking downward using the point of the elbow
Striking to the spine or the back of the head

By denying the use of these techniques you are going to have techniques develop that are UFC viable that won't translate well in many real situations because a viable counter to that technique is disallowed.

On knives with kicks I was sorta of referencing it's dangerous to attack an opponent wielding a weapon unless you've removed the use of the weapon for the duration of the attack. I cross trained a bit in a single weapon philipino style at college that really made me appreciate the true versatility of weapons. Every attack had a parry, attack the "weapon" (i.e. limb) that was used and press the advantage to continue the attack. If they attacked with a knife press block the hilt side and slit the wrist's tendons with your blade (or crush that elbow with your stick) [or do a joint lock on that elbow with no weapon]... with all sorts of distraction variants like stomp the foot, hit the far knee, knee or strike the ribs *then* cut the wrist. and then follow with a non disabling but killing strike, like between the ribs for the lungs or towards the neck for the arteries... A style like that which decides it's a good idea to guide your punch into their elbow as an opening attack/defense combo means that if you don't have control of that knife the inside of your thigh or muscle attachment at the knee is probably going to be attacked (unless you're luck and timed it right / caught them off guard despite not having a hand on their weapon).

A lot of them (like the eye gouge) themselves won't end the fight, worst case it screws up their vision which is much harder on untrained opponents (who depend on vision a lot more) and fighting at range. However it's a very good distraction for a follow up. OR if you're really mean you "fish hook" and grab the eye socket. Head control is ugly awesome.

I would be interested to see that marines vs MMA documentary, especially so to know what training the marines had and also to see some of the footage. But it could be a very good example of application of technique. Marines generally don't learn much in the way of technique but apply what they do know very well (sort of like other fighting systems like krav maga), MMA fighters while they have more technique have honed using it in a very different setting.

The key with multiple opponents is to force them to engage you one at a time. You need to very quickly either force one of them into the line of attack from another attacker, or put yourself in the same relative position. If you get clear disengage, otherwise don't let two of them attack at once. Throws, joint locks etc can be nice in this situation as you can use "disabling" one attacker as a weapon against another.

as for karate styles in general. Many of them are splinters from early development in Okinawa during a period that they had lost a war and weapons were banned in the region (to prevent uprisings or something). The result is that a lot of the styles that came out of this area focused heavily on closing the gap (as even your legs are shorter range that a sword) and delivering maximal power in a single strike (as that's probably all your going to get vs a guy with a sword). Hence you get a lot of these hard style power blocks (that are probably disarm attempts or limb sacrifices to a blade) followed by a huge power strike with no regard to defense at the moment of attack (by bringing the opposite hand back to provide additional counter rotation adding more power to the strike).

Wado is a weird, but it was very good for a first style. There was a little grappling, and we did have a few sacrifice throws. We focused a lot on combining strikes with what I'd now call jiu jitsu or aikido esc circular motions. Get off the line of attack, parry and strike. It prepared me well to have some super basics down when I took other styles that were much more heavily invested in throwing and grappling.

-O

autocorrect was my bane on that post it "corrected" ground and pound AND sprawl and brawl to things that looked vaguely right.

i have always said, 'real martial arts begin where fighting sports stop', and so far nothing i have seen or heard..or for that matter someone tried to convince me has managed to change that view.

Teidar Pallan Leinnol vs. Junior dos Santos — I have Fireblade as the favourite by 18 1/2.

Earlier UFC fights allowed most of these banned techniques, and I think some NHB fights in more permissive places still do. Notably, in one UFC someone won with groin kicks - plural (ouch), However, the other guy didn't have good defense vs kicks in general IIRC, and could have prevented those kicks the same way as low kicks to other areas. No kicks to a downed opponent does make a difference in strategy (in favor of ground grappling and thus BJJ which helped start up UFC), but I've seen talk of allowing it.

Most of those baned techniques use the same fundamentals as other techniques which have a similar short-term effect, without as much long-term consequences. For example, someone skilled enough to strike the throat, can usually strike the chin instead, and protecting the chin mostly protects the neck as well.

A self-defense oriented curriculum should consider techniques and counters that aren't safe for sparring, but also should be careful not to overestimate the value of those techniques, as well as the legal implications. Some people can take kicks to the groin and feel almost nothing, for example, whereas a palm strike to the chin is more reliable and probably causes less legal problems.



If you're wearing jeans and a tshirt, your legs might be better protected from cuts than your arms, so kicking the offending limb might be an option, or other targets depending on circumstance. I saw a (FMA) Dog Brothers video where a guy kicked the other in the head, even though both were armed and well trained, so I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss it.

As for low kicks: Stick high, kick low



Unfortunately the cases where I'd see an eye gouge ending a fight are the same ones where it would likely be considered excessive force.

Grabbing someone by the hair is probably kosher though, and can provide a convenient grip for some techniques.



Mobility is very important, you need room to maneuver so they can't surround you, otherwise you need to take the fight to them ASAP. A downed opponent isn't an immediate threat, so a quick pre-emptive trip/throw can temporarily bring the numbers down by 1, and possibly open up an escape route.



Jujutsu styles that Judo is derived from often set up a throw using a strike. For example, a palm strike to the head to set up [url=http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/osotogari.htm]Osoto Gari[/quote], which seems to be a very practical combo. Given Wado Ryu's Jujutsu roots, was there any of that?

Sadly, current judo tournament rules make many sacrifice throws useless as the referees can't tell who got thrown and often award victory to the wrong player, many grips and techniques are banned or restricted (notably bear hugs and leg grabs), and ground fighting often consists of one or both players turtling up. Luckily that's not what people usually do in the actual dojo, but it does have some unfortunate influence on what is emphasized in the curriculum.


[/quote]

Ah yes, one more reason why I don't believe the Singularity is imminent.

Truth. Most martial arts are combat systems. You can make a sport out of them (what can't be a sport, honestly?), but ultimately, they are meant to turn a person into a weapon.



Only 18.5 to 1? You're being very generous.

To Junior, that is.