You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Trading needs the same "revolution" that martial arts went through 15 years ago
- Thread starter IronFist
- Start date
Quote from bjjtrader:
...
You also cant claim "its the fighter" while pointing to MMA guys who train a mix of stuff, that doesnt make any sense. Apples and oranges. To determine if one style is superior, you must study it in its pure form against other styles. That has already happened in the early UFCs and other fighting orgs.
Are you ignoring the 100 random BJJ guy versus 100 random TKD thought experiments???
If styles didnt matter, then you could choose 100 random BJJ guys and make them fight 100 random tai-chi guys and you would get a 50/50 win/lose rate, but we know this is obviously not true. In this particular case it would probably be 100 to 0 for BJJ.
Maybe 99 to 1 due to a fluke.
STYLES MATTER, and its easily proven and has been proven mayny times. Its still proven to this day in MMA. Just look at what styles are clearly avoided in mma.
bjjtrader,
you are ignoring my point. I am saying that it is stupid to compare styles, and of course some will dominate others. Lets say you would do pancration against any other style - then pancration would win all matches - because they have the widest set of techniques where anything goes.
http://www.spartanacademy.com/history/index.htm
True original pankration is 90% lost. So no one can make claims that this "style", if you can even call it that, would win over all other styles.
Pankration is more of a sport with a set of near anything goes rules, similar to MMA, not necessarily a set of techniques that denotes a style.
MMA is not a style per se, either. Its M.M.A not "mma"
Pankration is more of a sport with a set of near anything goes rules, similar to MMA, not necessarily a set of techniques that denotes a style.
MMA is not a style per se, either. Its M.M.A not "mma"
Quote from Gringinho:
bjjtrader,
you are ignoring my point. I am saying that it is stupid to compare styles, and of course some will dominate others. Lets say you would do pancration against any other style - then pancration would win all matches - because they have the widest set of techniques where anything goes.
http://www.spartanacademy.com/history/index.htm
Quote from bjjtrader:
True original pankration is 90% lost. So no one can make claims that this "style", if you can even call it that, would win over all other styles.
Pankration is more of a sport with a set of near anything goes rules, similar to MMA, not necessarily a set of techniques that denotes a style.
MMA is not a style per se, either. Its M.M.A not "mma"
What point does it make if a style is 5 years old or 2500 years old? Recently resurrected or not.
In the end - if you stick to your line of thinking: nothing beats pancration, absolutely nothing.
My whole point is that it IS about the fighters - like Bruce Lee, Sebastiaan Rutten, Anderson Silva etc.
What point does it make?
It means everything if you have no idea what the real style was originally like. Modern day pankration is a re-invention.
We have no idea if it looks much like the original. Its based on a small number of historical fragments.
So all your claims about it beating everything are simply false and based on nothing more than a wild guess.
If you listed all the techniques illustrated in pankration we actually have artifacts for, you wouldnt have much of a style at all.
So no, its not about the fighters, for 2 reasons:
No 1) All styles are not equal - PROVEN FACT
No 2) There is no evidence that pankration contained all, or nearly all techniques or even a moderate number of techniques. Not even close. This is mostly wild historical extrapolation.
Styles matter, its so obvious its crazy anyone even tries to debate it.
Train in tai-chi for 10 years and a 6 month BJJ white belt will mop the floor with you anyway. Why? Because styles clearly matter.
Andersen Silva is a BJJ Black Belt and Muay Thai god. He is not a wing chun expert and aikido expert. Why? Because he wouldnt be the champ with those two weaker styles. STYLES MATTER. Its beyond debate.
It means everything if you have no idea what the real style was originally like. Modern day pankration is a re-invention.
We have no idea if it looks much like the original. Its based on a small number of historical fragments.
So all your claims about it beating everything are simply false and based on nothing more than a wild guess.
If you listed all the techniques illustrated in pankration we actually have artifacts for, you wouldnt have much of a style at all.
So no, its not about the fighters, for 2 reasons:
No 1) All styles are not equal - PROVEN FACT
No 2) There is no evidence that pankration contained all, or nearly all techniques or even a moderate number of techniques. Not even close. This is mostly wild historical extrapolation.
Styles matter, its so obvious its crazy anyone even tries to debate it.
Train in tai-chi for 10 years and a 6 month BJJ white belt will mop the floor with you anyway. Why? Because styles clearly matter.
Andersen Silva is a BJJ Black Belt and Muay Thai god. He is not a wing chun expert and aikido expert. Why? Because he wouldnt be the champ with those two weaker styles. STYLES MATTER. Its beyond debate.
Quote from Gringinho:
What point does it make if a style is 5 years old or 2500 years old? Recently resurrected or not.
In the end - if you stick to your line of thinking: nothing beats pancration, absolutely nothing.
My whole point is that it IS about the fighters - like Bruce Lee, Sebastiaan Rutten, Anderson Silva etc.
Quote from bjjtrader:
...
It means everything if you have no idea what the real style was originally like. Modern day pankration is a re-invention.
We have no idea if it looks much like the original. Its based on a small number of historical fragments.
So all your claims about it beating everything are simply false and based on nothing more than a wild guess.
...
Andersen Silva is a BJJ Black Belt and Muay Thai god. He is not a wing chun expert and aikido expert. Why? Because he wouldnt be the champ with those two weaker styles. STYLES MATTER. Its beyond debate.
Anderson Silva was a black belt WTF Taekwondo practitioner first; he started at age 14.
What does style have to say? Nothing - it's all in your head.
If you go to a real life fight and then "stay within the rules" of a competition style - then you are just nuts.
What facts do we know about pancration? Is the resurrection of pancration within these facts?
Have you any idea how ridiculous your claims are?
Have you any idea about the history of some styles like Hwa Rang Do or Kalarippayattu?
Or even Tai Chi, Judo, Sambo, BJJ, Okinawa karate, Kyokushinkai, American Kenpo etc?
So Silva is a TKD guy just because he's taken it?
This line of reasoning is absurd and misleading.
Silva clearly states he is a muay thai practitioner, not a TKD guy.
Ive taken TKD as well, does that make me a TKD guy? No it doesnt because 99% of my striking is muay thai based. Ive taken Karate too, and dont use it. Ive taken Hung Gar kung fu, and dont use it. Simply trying a style out and rejecting it does not make you a stylist, thats ridiculous. Using one or two moves from a style when the other 99% is a different style doesnt mean shit either.
Silva trains muay thai today and will tell you he is a muay thai guy not a TKD guy. He uses muay thai in the ring, not TKD.
So what does style have to say? Clearly everything.
Please explain why Silva practices MT every day and not TKD. You cant. So stop pretending he is things he is not. He is a MT/BJJ guy, and thats that. Clear as day.
Did I ever say you should stay within comp rules in a real fight? Where are you getting that nonsense???
You never answered many of my style questions which prove style matters. So ill ask again.
Why is it, that with hundreds, thousands of styles in the world, on a tiny tiny subset have been successful in MMA and NHB if styles dont matter???? WHY?
Why are there no champs with aikido or tai-chi as their core base of fighting??? WHY???
Lets here all the excuses now.
Sorry.... but you are clearly, and simply wrong on this and the data fully supports it.
Sherdog tracks MMA styles.
Please EXPLAIN why aikido and tai-chi are not on this list
http://sherdog.com/stats/powerratings/upr-styles-current
Might as well try and debate the sky is pink and yellow with polka dots.
So lets hear it. Or just admit styles matter.
PS: Ive met about 20 black belts in TKD that are like 10 years old LOLOLOL whooopie... you really think that garbage is the reason silva is champ??? For real????? Couldnt be that he's an awesome muay thai guy?
This line of reasoning is absurd and misleading.
Silva clearly states he is a muay thai practitioner, not a TKD guy.
Ive taken TKD as well, does that make me a TKD guy? No it doesnt because 99% of my striking is muay thai based. Ive taken Karate too, and dont use it. Ive taken Hung Gar kung fu, and dont use it. Simply trying a style out and rejecting it does not make you a stylist, thats ridiculous. Using one or two moves from a style when the other 99% is a different style doesnt mean shit either.
Silva trains muay thai today and will tell you he is a muay thai guy not a TKD guy. He uses muay thai in the ring, not TKD.
So what does style have to say? Clearly everything.
Please explain why Silva practices MT every day and not TKD. You cant. So stop pretending he is things he is not. He is a MT/BJJ guy, and thats that. Clear as day.
Did I ever say you should stay within comp rules in a real fight? Where are you getting that nonsense???
You never answered many of my style questions which prove style matters. So ill ask again.
Why is it, that with hundreds, thousands of styles in the world, on a tiny tiny subset have been successful in MMA and NHB if styles dont matter???? WHY?
Why are there no champs with aikido or tai-chi as their core base of fighting??? WHY???
Lets here all the excuses now.
Sorry.... but you are clearly, and simply wrong on this and the data fully supports it.
Sherdog tracks MMA styles.
Please EXPLAIN why aikido and tai-chi are not on this list
http://sherdog.com/stats/powerratings/upr-styles-current
Might as well try and debate the sky is pink and yellow with polka dots.
So lets hear it. Or just admit styles matter.
PS: Ive met about 20 black belts in TKD that are like 10 years old LOLOLOL whooopie... you really think that garbage is the reason silva is champ??? For real????? Couldnt be that he's an awesome muay thai guy?
Quote from Gringinho:
Anderson Silva was a black belt WTF Taekwondo practitioner first; he started at age 14.
What does style have to say? Nothing - it's all in your head.
If you go to a real life fight and then "stay within the rules" of a competition style - then you are just nuts.
What facts do we know about pancration? Is the resurrection of pancration within these facts?
Have you any idea how ridiculous your claims are?
Have you any idea about the history of some styles like Hwa Rang Do or Kalarippayattu?
Or even Tai Chi, Judo, Sambo, BJJ, Okinawa karate, Kyokushinkai, American Kenpo etc?
Quote from bjjtrader:
[ [/B]
First off, I don't consider myself to be any kind of expert. I started boxxing when I was 9, almost 10, and from the time I was 18 until I was 26 I was very active with Tang Soo Do. I enjoyed them both, but I was not fanatical and did them both mostly to have something to do, be active and do something fun.
I'd say though that all of the stuff about this style or that style is better then this one is just stupid. When I was growing up I was something of a trouble maker, we had nothing better to do here than fight, fuck and drink. I got in a lot of fights, and very rare was the fight that was a one on one "fair fight". If I got into a real world situation against 5 guys in the alley I would hate to be depending on BJJ and thinking it was going to do anything other than get me kicked in the head and possibly killed.