Brutal Efficiancy

[Achilles]

If Gun Kata is to work then It would have to be done like every real working martial art, simple. keep to the point with no extra flowery moves and dances. I am a Marine Corps Martial arts instructor I know what works and what does not. What works is simple. taekwando, capoera, kungfu-- do not work. Jujitsu- some karate do. Try them you will see.

slow is smooth, smooth is fast

[Rymel]

dude, do you even know what you just said? you're a marine corps instructor and you can't give respect where it's due? tell me again how capoeira doesn't work when it FREED SLAVES. tell me kung fu doesn't work with 2,000+ years of background to it. SOME kung fu is superfluous, and that's obvious. that doesn't mean it doesn't work. tae kwon do is a VERY poor example of what doesn't work, because it's a SPORT. tae kwon do was based off of korea's original national martial art, of which is a very effective style. i've seen marine corps martial arts, it's all stripped down FROM these very arts, so i'd watch it when i'm talking about what 'works'. the physical conditioning drills are straight out of kung fu, and i think the leg conditioning drills are akin to muy thai. i believe they looked to jiujitsu for their takedowns as well, an art that specializes in groundfighting. and lastly...given a marine's level of proficiency in killing, i don't think it does any art any justice unless you face off against established masters of their respective arts. and i don't mean 4 year black belts, i mean 4 years combat proven, because that's the basic equivalent imho.

but seriously though, i do like where you're coming from. send me a pm or im sometime, we can talk about gun kata.

edit: i forgot to say that i had this talk just yesterday with trustkill. we both agreed that gun kata cannot take after existing martial arts, and that it has to be as you said, brutally efficient. we're working off of that.

[TrustKill]

true. summed up brilliantly. people sometimes replace the neccessary with the "flashy fluffy fru-fru" stuff. you may be just the kind of person we need in our think tank for this sort of work

[Achilles]

Rymel,

This is not about respect. I respect all martial arts, But... When you have a diverse group of people who have studied martial arts and have them fight. 99 out of 100 times the one that you think i disrespected will not win. I am not saying that they have no use, its just that they have more fat to trim than the others. I used to be just like you, I was a defender of the more Fluid and gracefull martial arts. I practiced fung-fu and others. When it comes down to it. Real no sh*t fighting they dont work. The do work when you agree to abide by a set of rules, but once you do that it becomes a sport and not combat. MCMAP (Marine corps martial arts program) does come from about 17 different forms of combat. I am suggesting we take what works and ditch the rest.

On to the gun kata topic. We should brainstorm, I have also done alot of pistol work. We should start from the ground up, develop exersizes and instruction. I think having someone with opposing view points ( as we obviously have) would be a great fire to forge the gun kata in.

trustkill, thanks for the encouragement, have kept up with your posts for quite some time. Great insite, look forward to working with you.

[TrustKill]

word

[Rymel]

i got you. but honestly i still think the world's viewpoint of martial arts efficiency is skewed because 95% of all "real" combatants of their given arts are underground. the other 5% being competition and movies and what other crap people base it on. i've seen my friend's training with this guy who teaches eskrima in his GARAGE, and he still has the burst sticks to prove it...that guy was no joke. but i guess you're right for the most part, i still think with or without rules it really depends on the combatant, not the style. some fat CAN be trimmed from each style, but that's also what makes it unique to itself. for us though, it doesn't even matter. we can't use those as a basis, no such equal exists. i haven't met a single martial artist who respects a gun out of anything short of fear. i like the direction though, glad to have you join us ;D

and honestly, i don't see a firearms-based martial art seeing much use outside of military and law enforcement anyway. so it works out, heh.

[Achilles]

see. email Rymel

Trustkill, Word

[Rymel]

sent. if you find anything worthy enough to pass on, please post it in here. i don't know exactly what you'd think is good enough yet, but i think i got my point across right. if not there's always mroe emails...

[Achilles]

I would like to know more about this splashing hands thing you spoke of, i know of some of the drills but I am not 100 pn this one, your clarification yould be helpfull.

[TrustKill]

plus it would save me the trouble of researching for myself. hehehe. hahhahahaha. mmmwaahahahahahaha.

-yeah, i dunno...

[Achilles]

yea... or ...that....

[Rymel]

i don't know the drills but the concept is self-explanatory so it's not a problem. if you check martial arts magazines they advertise it as "11 strikes in one second!" and whatnot. basically it's chaining your attacks, primarily upper body, in quick succession to disorient your opponent. they're not power attacks, they're quick strikes. i'm not sure right now but i think it was used to display mastery of technique, destroy morale, and as i just said disorient the enemy. i mean what can you possibly be thinking when you're getting hit so many times at once other than "shit shit fuck fuck"?

as i explained to trustkill, there are about 8 arm-level strikes i can think of, but there may be more i don't know. 7 hand and 1 elbow. guns in hand or not, try to figure out what strike can come immediately after the last one. think kung fu movies and fighting games

[ebime]

I have to agree with Achilles in regard to "martial arts" being mostly ineffective to the real deal. What is commonly known as "martial arts" today is in reality nothing more than combat SPORTS. The REAL martial arts are, like Rymel said, mostly unknown and underground. Having no flashy moves, they don't appeal as much to joe average, and are thus not very popular in the mainstream.

Regarding te "splashhands" technique, I like the idea. maybe working it in a Kali/Arnis way would put realism into it? I think Kung Fu's "sticking hands" wouldn't apply as well.

My 0.02 cents

[Rymel]

ebime said:

I have to agree with Achilles in regard to "martial arts" being mostly ineffective to the real deal. What is commonly known as "martial arts" today is in reality nothing more than combat SPORTS. The REAL martial arts are, like Rymel said, mostly unknown and underground. Having no flashy moves, they don't appeal as much to joe average, and are thus not very popular in the mainstream.

Regarding te "splashhands" technique, I like the idea. maybe working it in a Kali/Arnis way would put realism into it? I think Kung Fu's "sticking hands" wouldn't apply as well.

My 0.02 cents

well, the real martial ARTISTS are mostly unknown and underground, but also some martial arts. i still don't like how joe average doesn't find less flashy arts appealing, but that's because hollywood - in all its infinite knowledge - doesn't know HOW to make them appealing. it's not that hard, just emphasize the moment of technique.

kali and arnis are sword styles aren't they? how would they work into a firearms-based splashing hands? i try to stay away from converting styles because there aren't any weapons that are similar in shape to a gun, unless you hold one bat-style, so if you have a different idea i'd like to hear it. as for sticking hands, it's done at the end of EQ, and it is a viable style to utilize, because it can be used to get OUT of a firing arc as well as staying completely within. granted if you were to use it to stay out of a firing arc by staying deep within (last scene of the movie was not THAT much bullshit), you could but with such a small margin of error it would be an advanced technique. i mean it's dangerous to be sweeping a gun around like that but hey, it beats standing there hoping you'll beat him to the punch. what do you think?

[kengou]

It's not the style, it's the man. Any art can fail, and any art can be effective in a real fight. I've seen Taekwondo people who could easily kick my ass with their feet, and I've also seen many who can do jumping spinning kicks but couldn't spar at all. I've seen plenty of wushu people who do the low flowery stanecs and jumps and all that, but I've also seen guys who could bash your head in using the skills gained by years of training. I understand what you mean, and I know that the military systems are quite effective. I just get kind of ticked off when people say traditional arts don't work in a fight. (I know that's not exactly what you said; I'm not attacking you specifically) Martial arts were designed to work in a fight; that is their entire purpose. Wushu has been around for thousands of years; Jujutsu (and Aikijutsu) were used quite effectively by Samurai during violent times to defend their lives. Taekwondo was used by Hwarang warriors to defend Korea. As some people here have said, don't go by what a small minority of martial artists in movies and competitions represent. There are a great majority of teachers and practitioners who no one has heard of, and who could kick ass using their traditional art.

[ViolentMessiah]

kengou said:

It's not the style, it's the man. Any art can fail, and any art can be effective in a real fight.

truer words have rarely been spoken here. what seperates a good fighter from a bad one is whats inside. you can know all the tchniques you want but it always comes down to who is tougher. primal fighting spirit is very important.

black belts get there asses kicked all the time by people who have never had any formalized martial arts training. why? because a street fighter doesnt practice in a controlled environment, his classroom is the street, the real thing.

i also disagree with the idea that kung-fu and other so-called graceful arts are ineffective. the foundation of my fighting knowledge is kung-fu based and i have yet to ever do a cat stance in real fight. there are obviously alot of moves that will not work in the real world and its up to each individual to realize that when he is studying an art.

[kengou]

I would also like to add that what seperates effectiveness from ineffectiveness lies in part with the training methods. If you train in forms and non-contact sparring, you probably won't be that effective in a real fight. However, if you are trained to use your techniques in realistic situations with Alive training, you stand a much better chance. I gaurentee there are people who could hit someone with a jumping spinning kick in a fight; it just depends on how good they are (and they'd have to be REALLY good, admittedly). And someone could use a cat stance in a fight, as long as they are trained properly in their art so that they know exactly how to use it properly. I am of the opinion that techniques aren't "ineffective" if they've been part of a martial art for so long. To go back to the example of the cat stance, Shaolin Kung Fu has used it as an integral part of its fighting system for an incredibly long time. I really doubt that it is inherently ineffective; it might just be very difficult to use, or perhaps it isn't being taught correctly anymore.

[ViolentMessiah]

i see what you're saying kengou, i think its according to personal style. i dont believe in specific stances and personally, i never use a fighting stance. i'v developed my own fighting theories and techniques that work for me. they're not for anyone else because everyone is different and i just used what i've learned over the years and adapted them to go well with my height, my level of fitness, etc. when i fight i dont square off with anyone, i feel i have a good idea when a fight is inevitable so i make sure i'm the first and the last to hit. i dont want to engage in a long drawn out battle so i go for vital areas from the get-go.

of course one has to be ready for different situations and have a plan B,C or D. this is how i do it, but that doesnt mean everyone should do it that way. this is what works for me and may not work for you.

thats what i think martial arts should be. each person studies different techniques from different styles and adapts the moves to fit their own body, morals, attitude, etc. your fighting style should be your own personal ecpression of who you are. thats my opinion anyway.

[gunnut]

Exactly.
The reason that there are so many different fighting styles is that there is no such thing as an "ultimate" style.
The way you fight always depends on the number of oponnents (is it spelled like that?),
their armament, strength, and skill, and even the environment.
If you look at the different styles you´ll see that they´re based on the fighting traditions of the region they were developed in.
Something like Gun-kata is a logical development, although the style itself is very unlogical.