Do those of you here feel that JKD is the most "perfect" system?

I saw a guy like that once too! His name was Billy, and he was a Green Beret. He would tell people ahead of time where he was going to kick them, and there was nothing they could do about it!

 

Exactly what I was thinking. "And there's not a damn thing you're gonna be able to do about it."

 

tackling what fire cobra said, i support the notion that muaythai is a sport, albeit a martial sport, along with wrestling and boxing

MMA itself has become a scientific approach to martial sports, like the UFC, etc. but the problem with that is that the cross-training in MMA is usually sport related, not street related, whereas the earlier MMA styles prior to the 50's were more specifically like military arts in my opinion, meant for actual combat, where no rules exist

 

The next person to bring up "sport vs street" should be permbanned

It's a moronic argument and there are plenty of rules in the street - they are called laws

The asininity* of claiming pre 1950's arts were for warfare is too stupid to even bother rebutting

* #me

 

You do realize that the purpose of hand to hand combat training in the military is to teach aggression? They aren't trying to teach you to be the next Billy, you don't have time for that.

Besides, fighting H2H is the last thing I would want. I'd much rather shoot you from say 200 yards. Or better yet call in some close air support.

Get real.

 

How do you train for the street without rules? The training itself has rules, to prevent serious injury to participants. That rule set is necessary, but just as limiting as any sport rule set. Training in shoes or throwing eye jabs at the BOB don't compare to the real thing either.

 

Ahem....

Oh you mean 1950's not 1850's?

 

finally, someone who makes sense

 

there are no rules in some places, either you have it or you dont, by that i mean discipline, i dont just walk in and say 'alright guys here are the rules for today', either you get it or you dont, we are speaking of something which doesn't even need to be said, and if it needs to be said then perhaps you shouldn't train with certain people if they cant restrain themselves without being told, but i guess a good example would be this:

in some schools, they will say 'this is meant to be an eyejab, but for safety reasons we always aim for the sternum when training' and many places will do this, but the problem with that approach is that it inspires inproper training, and develops inproper reflex actions in the student who is training that way, whereas at my school an eyejab is practiced correctly with the original intention and target it was designed for, aiming for the eyes, and if you cant practice that correctly without hurting someone, then you probably lack hand-eye-coordination and need to train more slowly, or you lack discipline and probably wouldnt cut it in my class anyway

just an example of some of the things im talking about

and in my class, we actually do practice striking the BOB with eyejabs to strengthen the fingers and give us the experience of physical resistance in eyejab training, to complement our live training experience, its about as close to the real thing as we can get our hands on at the moment

 

H2H training for military both modern and old is supplemental training. By this I mean it is not focused on. Military training is focused on tactics and the use of the primary weapon. It has been a long, long time since a soilders primary weapon was hands and feet. H2H is a last resort. Even todays modern spec ops units train with their firearms primarily.
I have no evidence but would be willing to bet that a good many professional "combat sports athletes" could beat many spec ops type guys in H2H because that is all they train for as opposed to we'll do some H2H stuff every month or two and supplement with some bar fights.

@M1k3jobs: I agree with you 100% but everyone knows Marine artillery is the "King of Battle"

 

Sorry Dave, I was air wing. Have to disagree.

 

I won't hold it against ya. Two of my brothers are 'wingers.

Swing with the wing as they say!

 

None of this made any sense. I won't spend time trying to impose any on it.

Have you hit real people in the eyes with your eye jab?

No. There are rules. You don't do that. Which means you haven't done that. Which means your practice is just as abstract as a competitive athlete's practice. Just in different ways. You just have to live with it.

And what I was talking about, as luck would have it. You said yourself (below) that it's as close as you can get. Thereby acknowledging that it's a rules-based abstraction. And not reality.

See above. You'll be able to see above because nobody's ever gouged your eyes out either.

 

Hm.

Do you mean, have I ever been poked in the eye during training? Actually, that's not a *no* that's a *yes*. Have I ever poked anyone in the eye during sparring? Once again, that's a yes. Was it intentional? Well, no, of course not, but in realistic training, things do tend to happen - But it's not like we have many injuries, and why is that? Because of that something which need not be said, that you claim does not make any sense.

 

I think anyone who's sparred without gloves, or with fingerless ones, has probably poked someone in the eye during training at some point.

What I'm having a hard time visualizing is the type of eye-jab you're referring to.

I can visualize being able to close someone's eyes, or flick at them with the fingertips, but how can you train to jab the eyes without ever injuring anyone's eyes in sparring?

Does not compute

 

By stopping before the moment of impact, with precision and discipline, and also, after many many years of slowly training, learning and gaining trust with your fellow practitioners, with incredible speed and accuracy

 

Ok, so not full (or any) contact then. I get it.

That validates ap oweyn's point about abstraction though, doesn't it?

 

It does indeed.

 

What I mean, which I assumed would have been fairly obvious at this point, is that you haven't executed the move precisely as you would do in reality. Accidentally poking someone in the eye is no more relevant to this discussion than it would be if we were talking about tennis. The point is that you have never driven your fingers into someone's eye sockets with intent the way you propose to do if it ever comes to it. That, my friend, is a necessary abstraction. And a reason not to get all high and mighty about "training for teh street."

 

i have watched many kung fu videos about how these guys train their fingertips by raking sand or rocks, and striking boards to cause minor microfractures which heal over time to give the practitioner 'iron fingertips' for poking, and some might say that is more realistic than what i do

but those people are way off track

for one, hopefully you will never have to use an eyejab ever again to defend yourself, but if you ever do, the first thing you will notice is that you don't have to 'drive your fingers into someone's eye sockets', not by a long shot, i mean you can if you want to, but really that to me is a waste of energy, you will find that all you really have to do is poke them in the eye, or even just graze the surface of their eye with your fingernail, and almost instantly it will cause blindness, at least temporarily

i mean, everyone here has gotten a microscopic grain of sand or dust in their eye at least once, and do you recall how it felt? it sucks, plain and simple, so it doesn't take much to obstruct a person's vision and take advantage of their blindness in a fight, you dont have to use any external strength or internal power, all you need is speed and precision, and if you can practice that in real life during training without ever striking your target, then you can be sure it will work in real life when you actually strike with intent