Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Most brutal art?
#1
Question 
On another board, the question was asked, "what is the most brutal martial art".  My answer was WWII combatives.  Another poster answered, "If you are into martial arts to be brutal and vicious then you are in it for the wrong reasons".  I disagreed and responded with the following:


Quote:I'm not sure I can fully agree with you. It depends on your focus. For example, if you're sport-oriented then being brutal to your sparring partner or an opponent is definitely not very cool. On the other hand, if your focus is self-defense then you need to have that as the mind set from the very beginning. To clarify, not that you go out of your way to 'be brutal' or just try to hurt people 'just because' but rather if you're in a situation where all of your non-force options have been taken away and you are forced to use force then the attacker's safety is no longer a concern. You have to have the mindset that you will do whatever it takes to accomplish the task of your safety (or the safety of another). At this point there is no holding back, no pulling punches. As I'm fond of saying, minimal force is not necessarily minimum force. Every situation will be different and the minimum force in one situation may be a stun-n-run while in another it may be deadly force. Once needs to be able to successfully navigate both scenarios with tools that will accomplish either.


What are your thoughts?
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#2
(09-26-2016, 11:54 AM)Kong Soo Do Wrote: On another board, the question was asked, "what is the most brutal martial art".  My answer was WWII combatives.  Another poster answered, "If you are into martial arts to be brutal and vicious then you are in it for the wrong reasons".  I disagreed and responded with the following:


Quote:I'm not sure I can fully agree with you. It depends on your focus. For example, if you're sport-oriented then being brutal to your sparring partner or an opponent is definitely not very cool. On the other hand, if your focus is self-defense then you need to have that as the mind set from the very beginning. To clarify, not that you go out of your way to 'be brutal' or just try to hurt people 'just because' but rather if you're in a situation where all of your non-force options have been taken away and you are forced to use force then the attacker's safety is no longer a concern. You have to have the mindset that you will do whatever it takes to accomplish the task of your safety (or the safety of another). At this point there is no holding back, no pulling punches. As I'm fond of saying, minimal force is not necessarily minimum force. Every situation will be different and the minimum force in one situation may be a stun-n-run while in another it may be deadly force. Once needs to be able to successfully navigate both scenarios with tools that will accomplish either.


What are your thoughts?

I think there is some legitimacy to the sense that ONLY getting brutality out of martial arts is doing the training a disservice. It's a strange balance in martial arts vs. pure SD vs. sport.

Sport is about winning, period

SD is about surviving, period.

MA is about blending technique, expression, character, and effectiveness. Which means it's not all about brutality, but honest SD should be a very real and honest thrust of training.
Reply
#3
The origin of martial art(s) was for battlefield unarmed combat - in essence live or die. Now down through the many years that the martial arts have evolved into a sporting realm on one hand and on the other, an out let for getting in shape, in some areas, a spiritual journey and still for others a gathering place to associate with new people. In many instances, it's even become a day care setting, so one can see just how far from the origins that it has migrated.

Now can there be an honest division between what's been described above and the original origin? Yes and No....................Yes, if the teacher and the student fully understand the difference between the two entities and can have that desired mindset to engage drastically (brutally if you will) when it's really called for and NO, if neither teacher or student understand the difference or are not willing to achieve that desired understanding / mindset.

The basic position or rather differential between sport and self defense, aside from mindset, is target acquisition. Example; sport=punch to the chest protector.......self defense=punch to the throat (depending upon severity of the situation). But, one must have that correct mindset that says/allows one to do intential physical harm to another and sadly, the vast majority of folks just don't have it in them to do it..........
Reply
#4
(09-28-2016, 03:51 AM)sidekick Wrote: But, one must have that correct mindset that says/allows one to do intential physical harm to another and sadly, the vast majority of folks just don't have it in them to do it..........


They've never been introduced to the proper mindset by either reality or a good instructor.  I remember a Women's SD class I was teaching years ago.  I was talking about gouging the eyes of an attacker when one of the women stated that she could never do that to someone.  I asked her if she had children and she said she had a 10 year old daughter.  I asked her what your reaction would be if she walked in an an attacker was trying to sodomize her 10 year old daughter, she stated she'd rip his throat out.  I asked, 'what's the difference then'?  She understood.  

Another example that I often point out is the TKD BB that I taught.  She was around 2nd Dan and she was very good at sport.  But she'd never actually trained in any sort of realistic self defense and almost freaked when I started teaching grappling to the class.  She was great at tippy-tap punching and acrobatic kicking but had never actually grabbed another student in a grapple or to take down.  

If one is in the arts to get fit, or socialize or reach their inner being or whatever then more power to them.  If it's for self-defense they need to be properly prepared to use the actual martial arts, as appropriate, to defend themselves and others.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#5
I do not think you can remove the brutality part from self-defense training.  If you are trying to simulate something a little closer to real life, than you have to accept that brutality is part of the equation.  It is extremely difficult to use force without brutalizing your opponent in a real life situation.  Your skill set, or advantageous position, has to be significantly better than your opponent's (or opponents') to avoid brutality.  So, in certain scenarios one could transcend the need for brutality, but that does not remove brutality from the equation.

The predator is trying to brutalize you or your loved ones.  If you take brutality out of the equation, you cripple yourself.

This reality is why character training is so important.  It is not the "how we fight" that must be so different, it is the "why we fight" that must be so different.

The predator is fighting because he wants to kill, rape, steal, plunder, or destroy.  The man of peace fights to protect that which is worth protecting.
Martial Arts done well leads to a more virtuous life because everyone is fighting something.

"If your eye is single, your whole body will be full of light.  But if your eye is evil, even the light that is within you will be darkness.  If the light that is within you is darkness, how great is that darkness?"  (Jesus of Nazareth)
Reply
#6
Unless you've already seen the pre-fight attack indicators (verbal dialogue coupled with proximity, clenched fists, tapping the leg, movement back and forth. 1000 yard stare etc) and are ready for the attack, or commit to a pre-emptive strike then you are reacting to the attacker's action which means your starting at a position of disadvantage.  You may need sheer 'brutality' of motion to regain an advantageous position.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#7
I think the most brutal martial arts are the ones that have the most unforgiving moves for example kali a knife fighting art from the philipines I would classify as being very brutal every knife strike is to kill and in that art one wrong move can not be taken back. the brutality is the weapon they use so any art that focuses on kill every move and you can't openly practice it that also goes for sword and other weapons are all brutal. Know thats not to say that hand to hand fighting arts are not as brutal either but for most you can practice and have some none lethal training if you are carful. Other than that its a question of the individual and the type of attack they are fighting off.
Reply
#8
Weapons training aside (for excellent reasons that d_spencer listed), old school Uechi-ryu/Pangai-noon seems fairly brutal.

Grandmaster Schultz, wasn't Pangai-noon your original style?  Am I remembering that correctly?
Martial Arts done well leads to a more virtuous life because everyone is fighting something.

"If your eye is single, your whole body will be full of light.  But if your eye is evil, even the light that is within you will be darkness.  If the light that is within you is darkness, how great is that darkness?"  (Jesus of Nazareth)
Reply
#9
That is correct.  Although categorized as 'half hard/half soft, it is mainly taught as mostly hard.  I did a lot of hard body conditioning over the years while in this art and it's served me well over the years.  Overall, I'd consider it an incomplete art in that I personally don't believe that Uechi Kanbun Sensei knew or taught the complete art as he learned it in China.  And it was certainly revamped over the years by his son, grandson.  

Chin Na, Hapkido and Aiki Jujutsu have filled in the blanks for me over the years as well as learning to really study the katas of various arts.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#10
I have done a (very) little training in aiki jujutsu with Grandmaster Ali Shabazz.  In fact, I am going to his school this Saturday.  Ali Shabazz trained under Moses Powell.

The tight circles of aiki-jujutsu seem brutally devastating when executed well.  Ali Shabazz is a small man in his seventies, but the force he can generate (or it might better be said as "multiply") is impressive.
Martial Arts done well leads to a more virtuous life because everyone is fighting something.

"If your eye is single, your whole body will be full of light.  But if your eye is evil, even the light that is within you will be darkness.  If the light that is within you is darkness, how great is that darkness?"  (Jesus of Nazareth)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)