>Asian arts: You have to train neijin and dim mak for 50 years to attack internal organs!
>Western arts: Hold my beer.
 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
|
>Asian arts: You have to train neijin and dim mak for 50 years to attack internal organs!
It's not even bait. Boxing literally specializes in attacking the organs and nervous system: Knockouts are concussions, solar plexus, liver, spleen, rabbit punches on the brain stem and kidney punches if you count fouls, heart punches etc.
Karate and kung fu just break bones.
The only thing karate and Kung fu break are wooden boards lol
Can it really be bait if its 100% accurate?
Bait, but agreed. Traditional Eastern Arts (kung-fu, karate, taekwondo, kempo) just seem so useless for practical fighting ability vs Western combat sports and modern hybrid martial arts like boxing, kickboxing, wrestling, submission wrestling, MMA.
Muay Thai is great but I would argue it is different to the other Asian arts described as it has no lineage from kung-fu that those have and is a modern hybrid art since it got hybridized & modernised with British & French boxing in the early 1900s.
"Traditional" is a dumb label. Boxing and wrestling are both way older than tkd and kenpo, both of which aren't even 100 years old. The only real difference between TMA and "modern" MA is training method and sport rules. Biggest factor is whether they practice forms/kata and whether they fight full contact or not. If you throw a muay thai guy into a tkd competition he's going to do very poorly and vice-versa. Obviously, in a self defense situation, you are better off with skills in a full contact MA, but then you are also better off with a knife or a stick. So how effective a MA is depends on context, and practicing MA is not really about defending yourself. You can learn the practical and effective skills for self defense in a month or two.
Attacks to vulnerable targets is universal across martial arts. Kung fu and karate have techniques which specifically target the eyes, groin, mouth, nose, ears, fingers, etc., which modern/sport MA do not because of rules. Bone breaking is generally not the goal, as breaking a major bone which will incapacitate someone is much less efficient than hitting softer targets. Therefore, TMA is allowed more targets and focuses more on them than modern MA. Although you could argue modern MA attacks vulnerable points more effectively because of full contact practice. I would argue that TMA can just as easily do the same AND practice no contact dirty techniques and thus still have the advantage.
>and thus still have the advantage.
They lose every time.
This isn't true at all you are moronic. There have been mixed-style competitions for decades now. Where pretty much just biting, eye gourging, and dick kicks aren't allowed.
Flowerly Eastern Gi based arts have proven useless 9/10 times with Kung-Fu especially shit as it's failed every time.
Modern hybrid arts like Japanese Kickboxing have some value sure. But literally no TMAs are useful for actually fighting, just larping that you are a Chinaman/Jap.
Western martial arts, namely wrestling and boxing just shit all over Kung-Fu-derived Eastern arts (i.e. kung-fu, karate, kenpo, taekwondo) regardless of what ping pong yang doo school it's from.
That graph is misleading as they make some questionable choices on what they consider each fighter's primary style.
A based autist crunched the numbers of the effectiveness of every style in the UFC and did a better job.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vR_Ke0zuo9Ec_Muc79QP2wdC1YyHk3sA_MEsUb2I3v-v8uBuiCnwJr2dw26iGbu0YLCY_EF4_L8a-Hq/pubhtml
It's not perfect, but it's a good representation to show that not all eastern arts are bullshit. Kung fu is bullshit, but karate shouldn't be lumped in with it. Sure, there's a bunch of no-contact daycare mcdojo karate people out there, but there are more than enough karate-based champions throughout kickboxing and MMA to vouch for its effectiveness.
you've also got to factor in the cultural and geographical features of the UFC. it's big in the Americas and so a lot of the fighters come from the more popular forms of martial arts, like boxing, wrestling and BJJ. the shift towards eastern europe has introduced a lot more variety, with guys from judo, sambo etc. coming in. in asian competitions, you see a lot more of those styles you don't get in the UFC (e.g. sanda) and in some cases those styles can dominate, like fedor who was primarily a judoka and easily the best heavyweight of all time.
but yeah frick kung fu lmao
or for another example, look at kickboxing back before anyone really bothered with inviting thais. was muay thai ineffective and impractical because it wasn't seen in US kickboxing competitions at the time? obviously not.
>was muay thai ineffective
Was kickboxing?
Kickboxing's main weakness in that era was the lack of low kicks. The supposed rape of Rick Roufus by Changpuek Kiatsongrit in 1988 wasn't as telling as you think since the Thai got a broken jaw and was knocked down. Had Roufus known low kick defense, he would have won. It was dodgy, since MT was widely known by then - Benny Urquidez and others had already fought and defeated Nak Muay in the 70s and early 80s, so it's not as if low kicks were unknown. IMO this fight was a ploy to popularize Muay Thai - which only became big in the 90s with K1 and Bas Rutten's Pancrase exploits, anyway.
There you have it:
>Rick came in unprepared for low-kicks and for good reason: the rules were announced last minute and to defend low-kicks is an art in itself.
no, I'm just saying that the lack of thai fighters in the biggest western kickboxing organisation didn't mean muay thai wasn't a good kickboxing style in the same way that the lack of eastern styles in the UFC doesn't mean that eastern styles aren't also useful.
some like taekwondo are taught so poorly that it's unlikely to produce many good fighters, then there's the wing chung, aikido and wushu types which are completely useless, but stuff like sanda, bökh or shuai jiao could be good, you just don't get anyone using it
Traditional martial arts simply aren't effective compared to constantly pressure tested full contact combat sports.
E.g. Japanese karate only became effective when it became Japanese kickboxing. JuJutusu primarily when it became Shooto or BJJ.
Kung Fu becomes effective when it becomes Sanda and Shuai Jiau. But at that point unless you are Chinese or lice there you might as well just to kickboxing and submission wrestling..
>Kung Fu becomes effective when it becomes Sanda
Please stop perpetuating this horseshit meme. Sanda is a legit fighting system but its not "the application of traditional kungfu"
Which is partly my point. Once pressure tested and forced to evolve you really end up with only 2 martial arts left, kickboxing and submission wrestling. Everything ends up being one or the other and looking identical. Then combine those and you have MMA (see kudo, combat sambo, vale tudo, and unified MMA).
MT is de facto western kickboxing because the western influence is so big, just like old styles of escrima are basically a time capsule of renaissance southern Euro HEMA. There is little Asian stuff in there, just miniscule amounts of cultural baggage mostly. If you read old military fencing manuals from the time and region, it's all in there: The emphasis on slashing over thrusting, the X angle shadow fencing, the training methods and so on. Even the way of gripping the weapon is more fencing than anything asiatic.
What would be interesting is if there are styles that preserved the medieval/renaissance unarmed methods. Japanese Jiu Jitsu was obviously heavily influenced by Euro self defense methods, but the really old stuff has vanished AFAIK (eg the original Yoshin Ryu from 17th century Nagasaki, which appeared and replaced the native sumai just as the Europeans arrived).
Are you baiting or what? Jiujitsu aims to achieve a temporary dominant position with joint locks and throws to finish off the opponent with side arms. It has existed since when the years had 3 digits, it is the hand to hand martial arts of the battlefield. What euro influence are you talking about? Similar techniques can be explained with the fact that the human body turns and twists the same way east and west
this is completely incorrect.
american long pants kickboxing in the 80s/90s was just full contact karate. guys like Stephen Thompson still fight with that same style, ant t's very different to muay thai
Western kickboxing =/= full contact karate
Western kickboxing is Dutch kickboxing, savate etc.
There is nothing in muay thai that doesn't also exist in these western styles, just different priorities (eg. clinching).
Yeah. Even full contact karate and American kickboxing refers to a variety of different styles and rulesets (ex: WKA vs PKA and others back in the day) and wasn't all no low kicks. Western kickboxing encompasses more than a lot of people realize. That difference in priorities does make a huge difference though of course.
Agreed. It's representative. Yes absolutley karatekas who went into full contact sports then MMA have proven effective.
Wrestling just shits all over it. Especially Oly Judo.
True and valid points. American kickboxing was about 10-15 years old when Thais came in and started wrecking their shit. MMA is now 40 years old..
If a bunch of Kung-Fu masters haven't come in now and wrecked shit they never will. Dagestani wrestlers who are far fewer in number compared to the fricking billions of Chinese people have come in and done so..
>1 karate
>They put Robert Whittaker not even Machida
Lol what mongaloid made that graph? If Whittaker is karate by that standard so is GSP Chuck, Chuck Liddel, Bas Rutten etc.
umm judo is extremely traditional and also extremely efficacious sweaty
Don't worry anon I'm sure someone will use your totally real and effective Kung-fu style in a real fight one one day
>ITT: Keyboard warriors who never train at all argue which style they never train in is more effective.
>ITT: Internet toughguys argue the deadliness of combat sports and the ineffectuality of martial arts
>ITT: morons compare two completely different disciplines with completely different goals, methodology, and philosophy.
This board is a surefire way to get tired of this dumb shit real fricking quick. Everyone thinks they're proving something and the only point being proven is how fricking stupid y'all
are
There's literally an entire sport which has been testing the effectiveness of completely different disciplines, their deadliness, and which is more effective for 40 years now. I would suggest that YOU are the moron internet tough guy keyboard warrior for not acknowledging this basic objective fact.
Name one pro fighter who doesn't have a background in a traditional martial art
>protip
>you can't
Agreed. Unless heavily cross-trained to the point it doesn't resemble the traditional art any more.
In martial arts there are many different goals, disciplines, and philosophies. We need more respect between disciplines. Especially considering the symbiotic relationship.