Thread: Martial Arts Styles

ha i have that same pic at my studio cracks me up!!!!!
[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by georgej

Anyone practice Hapkido or Ninjitsu? They seem interesting, I don't have any exposure to these styles. Wondering what kind of perspectives are out there?

To quote Musashi "The WAY is in training"

Try one & see if it suits you. People take up martial arts for various reasons ultimately it doesn't matter what you do but what effect you have.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

One of the biggest differences in styles, is the fight mentality, does it hold Defense, as the all encompassing thought "Don't react until they make a move, then re-direct it" or is it more war like, and teaches "When confronted, hit first, hit hard, and keep pressing the attack until your opponent has either lost the ability or will to continue" ....

These are all things that you have to think about when picking your style, school, or instructor...

Absolutely. To turn this back to the original question: in ninjutsu there is no concept of hitting first. You wait until the other person does something, and that is when things start.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Absolutely. To turn this back to the original question: in ninjutsu there is no concept of hitting first. You wait until the other person does something, and that is when things start.

I am going to disagree with this statement. We do a lot of attacking first here in Japan to take out an opponent before he even gets to the point of wanting to hit you.

Interesting. It is not how I perceive things currently. But I grant that I am nowhere near as experienced as you. Everything I have seen so far indicates that an escape / defense / counterattack always begins with an attacker making a move or wanting to make a move. Although I should have used the word 'attack' instead of 'hit'.

I once read an interview with Hatsumi sensei where he is quoted as saying 'Ni Sente Nashi' so I took that as confirmation of the 'no first strike' philosophy.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Interesting. It is not how I perceive things currently. But I grant that I am nowhere near as experienced as you. Everything I have seen so far indicates that an escape / defense / counterattack always begins with an attacker making a move or wanting to make a move. Although I should have used the word 'attack' instead of 'hit'.

I once read an interview with Hatsumi sensei where he is quoted as saying 'Ni Sente Nashi' so I took that as confirmation of the 'no first strike' philosophy.

Yes, what you will mostly see is defensive but there are whole sections of several schools that are offensive. Hatsumi-sensei doesn't speak of this often publicly because he doesn't want to have a bunch of people going around attacking people and saying it was from him. So he stresses the defensive aspect. Remember there are sections on assassination so that would be offensive.

Ok I understand.
Perhaps it would be better to say that anything you will train for the first umpteen years will have the defensive nature I mentioned.

It is the same under Tanemura sensei. Practisioners only get access to the 'juicy stuff' from 4th dan upwards. Anyone not having a master title is not really on the map. Getting there will take about 15 to 20 years.
Even studying the individual ryuha in earnest has to wait until black belt level which takes 7 to 10 years.

Personally I have to say I agree with this approach, even though I have heard people complain about it (on martialtalk.com). There are enough fantasy ninja and immature martial artists already.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Perhaps it would be better to say that anything you will train for the first umpteen years will have the defensive nature I mentioned.

This is the case with the Jujutsu I learn/teach. At sho dan the defensive concept is replaced with a concept of being in control of the attacker/s. It is not so much offensive, as nullifying the attackers potential from the start but could easily be used offensively if necessary hence it is not taught at student levels.

So far I like Krav-Maga a lot. I did it for a couple of months and I like the mentality that comes along with it.

It's no-nonsense, you get attacked, you hit HARD, FAST and get out. No BS about rules, no crap about what's allowed and what's not.

You show me a man with principles in a fight and I'll show you a man with a weakness.

It's self defense, it's purpose is to teach you how to get home safely, not how to score, not how to kill the guy, none of that matters. The only way to do it right is to get home intact.

Wanna see some Krav-Maga style combat? Watch the film "Taken".

Originally Posted by LX_Emergency

No BS about rules, no crap about what's allowed and what's not.

That's why I stopped TKD. How can a martial art where you can't hit the face, so you don't defend the face, prepare you for a real life situation.

In stand up MMA, I sparred against a TKD guy. His kicks were brutals, but each time he was about to launch one, I just had to fake a face punch, and it was enough to stop his kick, because he wasn't prepared to get hit in the face.