Nos Partenaires

Auteur Sujet: Arts martiaux/RBSD qui a vraiment raison?  (Lu 20078 fois)

30 juillet 2010 à 21:47:00
Réponse #50

sharky


C'est là la fausse idée qu'on se fait lorsqu'on prononce le therme "karaté". J'ai pratiqué le karaté Shotokan avant d'en arriver au Kemposhinkai et je peux affirmer que le second est loin d'être aussi codifié que les karatés dits "traditionnels" et qu'il colle au plus près à la réalité. Il suffit d'assister à quelques cours pour s'en rendre compte. Enfin, je parles en connaissance de cause  ;#

Je m'incline alors  ;#
C'est pas parce que c'est mieux que c'est bien. Il y a quand même en kimono, tu fais un salut, il y a des coups de pied vachement haut donc c'est plus près de la réalité mais c'est encore loin.
''what you learn in the afternoon must work for you that evening in the parking lot" Kelly Mc Cann

"despite what your mamma told you, violence does solve problems." Ryan Job

30 juillet 2010 à 21:57:53
Réponse #51

Gizmo


Il n'y a pas, a mon avis, de technique qui domine les autres, c'est au combattant de maitriser son sujet à l'instant "T"
Le kimono, c'est mieux que tout nu  :lol: et le coup de pied à la tête, quand on sait le donner, c'est puissant, efficace et ça garde l'adversaire à distance... De toute façon, rien de tel qu'un coup de pied bien placé et de bonnes jambes pour filer. ;D

30 juillet 2010 à 22:07:31
Réponse #52

Gizmo


C'est très exigeant, Serge Kal est apparemment un bon technicien plutôt complet, mais rien de neuf sous le soleil et a 10000 lieux de la triste réalité d'un affrontement brutal et vicieux ou les méchants déguisent leurs intentions jusqu'au moment de frapper.

J'espère aussi que vous laissez les coups de pieds hauts (hanches bloqués  :'(), les clés de poignets sur attaque au couteau et les soumissions au sol pour les démonstrations.

C'est une vidéo de démo, pour se faire une idée du style et pour le spectacle, et non un combat de rue. T'inquiètes pour les coups de pieds, il sait les donner... Comme je l'ai dit, essayez pour vous faire une opinion réaliste. ::)

30 juillet 2010 à 22:11:39
Réponse #53

Gizmo



30 juillet 2010 à 22:13:59
Réponse #54

Gizmo


D'après vous, qu'est-ce qui se rapproche le plus de la "réalité" ? ;)?

30 juillet 2010 à 22:14:47
Réponse #55

sharky


Garder l'esprit ouvert...

Et ouvre un peu le tien.
Je crois bien que tu as découragé Patrick qui a tout effacé. :o

Edit
D'après vous, qu'est-ce qui se rapproche le plus de la "réalité" ? ;)?

Prends le temps de lire ce qui s'est passé dans cette section depuis quelques années, fouille les différents fils de discussion, tu trouvera tes réponses par toi même.
''what you learn in the afternoon must work for you that evening in the parking lot" Kelly Mc Cann

"despite what your mamma told you, violence does solve problems." Ryan Job

30 juillet 2010 à 22:31:29
Réponse #56

Patrick


Je crois bien que tu as découragé Patrick qui a tout effacé. :o
Non, je me suis rendu compte tout simplement de l'inutilité de mon propos. Ce que je pratique aujourd'hui est le fruit d'un long cheminement personnel bordé de rencontres, certaines heureuses d'autres fâcheuses. Je suis passé par là ou en est Gizmo et ce qu'il appelle la réalité, j'y croyais aussi au même moment. Juste avant de la prendre en pleine poire  :)

C'est un constat d'inutilité profonde qui m'a fait retiré mes propos.

Je te souhaite bonne pratique Gizmo.

30 juillet 2010 à 22:47:26
Réponse #57

Gizmo



31 juillet 2010 à 00:14:34
Réponse #58

Sieg



 Salut Gizmo !

 Juste pour répondre a ta question : qu'est ce qui se rapproche de la réalité?

  Comme tu as lu le topic depuis la premiere page  :), tu as noté que je cherchais une structure me permettant de pratiquer et d'apprendre la SD de la facon la plus realiste et pragmatique possible. Une fois n'est pas coutume au lieu de dire  ce qui fait qu'une discipline se rapproche de cet idéal, je vais te dire ce qui a mon sens et dans le cadre de ma recherche fait qu'une discipline ne colle pas avec le réalisme que je recherche.
   Je voudrais pas passer pour un je sais tout, je suis bien conscient de mon statut de plus que novice, on dira que c'est une synthese de ce que j'ai appris sur le forum depuis quelques mois  :). Ce n'est pas un classement par ordre de grandeur...

 -Le fait que des enfants (10-15 ans) assistent a un cours ou on est censé apprendre a blesser très serieusement voir tuer l'opposant, donc soit on ne leur enseigne pas les techniques de SD et il y a tromperie sur la marchandise ( a la limite pas grave ) soit le professeur est fou. Apparement c'est le cas dans ton club
 
 -La présence de techniques non adaptées a la rue. les coups de pieds a la tete que j'ai vu a répétition dans la vidéo ( ok c'est une démo commerciale ) + les longs finish au sol, franchement pas recommandés dans la rue. Les coup de pieds ca peut marcher c'est vrai, mais le rapport avantage-cout est pas franchement en leur faveure, sans compter qu'en costard pompe de bureau, chaud a placer le high kick  ::).

 -La vidéo de promo en elle meme me gene un chtouille, on voit une vidéo ou un élève essaye de nous faire croire qu'il attaque de bonne foie et avec toute sa hargne son maitre ( dieu ). Evidement il n'en est rien les coups sont mou et téléphonés. Ce rapport de respect proche de la vénération et cette soumission qu'on a envers le maitre dans ce genre de pratique me gene car elle empeche d'avoir un esprit critique vis a vis de la discipline, et donc elle reste figé. Leif l'a très bien expliqué quelques post plus hauts.

 -La technique de défense sur couteaux, au bas mot une chance sur deux, que ton prof se le prenne dans l'avant du bras si c'est un agresseur décidé qui tient le couteau. "bonjour madame l'artere comment allez vous ???  ".

 -Le port d'un kimono meme si c'est pas quelque chose de dramatique, fait qu'on colle un peu moins a la réalité. J'ai lu plusieurs fois "on s'entraine comme on combat" Voila l'idée qui résume le truc. Pour coller a la réalité vaut mieux s'entrainer dans une tenu civil, et a des situation originales, variés et auxquels on pourrait etre confronté. J'avais vu une petite scene presque théatrale dans un stage de SD, ou un pratiquant était au cinéma avec sa belle ( qui s'appelait en réalité marcel et faisait 1 tete de plus que lui  ;D ) et se retrouvait confronté a un ou deux cherches m*rde  joués par les autres pratiquants..... :up:.

 -Un club trop commercial, affichant par exemple sur son site des slogans choques ayants pour but de vous persuader que vous aller devenir un big boss en quelques mois . Dans le meme sens la présence d'enfants renforce cette aspect ( les bambins ca fait rentrer beaucoup de thune !! ), ou la multi-disciplinalité ( club de kickboxing-thai-karate-judo-fitness-taichi....), En gros les structures facon usine a gaz

 -Enfin, un des trucs les plus importants Les disciplines qui ne font que du combat et/ou technique et ou les autres aspects pourtant extrements importants dans la SD, comme la desescalade, la prévention, le rapport a l'agression avant/apres, passent completements a la trape.
 

 
 Voila c'est pas une liste exhaustive, c'est ce qui m'est venu a l'esprit a chaud, aussi, meme si certains de ces point "negatifs" s'appliquent apparement a ta discipline ce n'est pas le cas de tous. Et surtout, si cette discipline te plait et que tu t'eclate a la pratiquer, continue !!!! :). C'etait juste pour t'aider a comprendre qu'est ce qui pourrait etre considérer comme une discipline de SD réaliste.

 Peace !

31 juillet 2010 à 08:08:12
Réponse #59

Gizmo


OK, OK, apparemment, tout le monde trouve des points négatifs  :-\... Mais il y a une bonne base pour faire une synthèse avec d'autres techniques, je penses, comme dans beaucoup de disciplines...

Les techniques de self-défense ne sont-elles pas tirées des arts martiaux, notamment le ju-jitsu ?

31 juillet 2010 à 10:00:01
Réponse #60

force999


Non, je me suis rendu compte tout simplement de l'inutilité de mon propos. Ce que je pratique aujourd'hui est le fruit d'un long cheminement personnel bordé de rencontres, certaines heureuses d'autres fâcheuses. Je suis passé par là ou en est Gizmo et ce qu'il appelle la réalité, j'y croyais aussi au même moment. Juste avant de la prendre en pleine poire  :)

C'est un constat d'inutilité profonde qui m'a fait retiré mes propos.

Je te souhaite bonne pratique Gizmo.

réaction sage d' un homme bien, Lorsque l’homo sapien souhaite entreprendre un voyage que le transporte d’une rive d’ un fleuve à une autre rive, il doit le faire à la nage, il doit lutter contre les courants, boire la tasse, et apprendre à gérer la peur de la noyade, alors seulement il apprend de lui-même , être maître nageur oui, passeur en barque non. Au milieu du fleuve seulement se révèle les personnalités, le milieu du fleuve sépare l’Homme du petit garçon ou de la petite fille. La sélection est ainsi naturelle et sans ambiguïté.  

bien à toi

JL
l' espèce humaine est la seule à se croire libre parce qu'elle parle et que l' abstraction permise par le langage lui a fait croire à la réalité de ses conceptions abstraite .

31 juillet 2010 à 10:04:28
Réponse #61

sharky


réaction sage d' un homme bien, Lorsque l’homo sapien souhaite entreprendre un voyage que le transporte d’une rive d’ un fleuve à une autre rive, il doit le faire à la nage, il doit lutter contre les courants, boire la tasse, et apprendre à gérer la peur de la noyade, alors seulement il apprend de lui-même , être maître nageur oui, passeur en barque non. Au milieu du fleuve seulement se révèle les personnalités, le milieu du fleuve sépare l’Homme du petit garçon ou de la petite fille. La sélection est ainsi naturelle et sans ambiguïté.  

bien à toi

JL

Patrick et JL,
Sincèrement merci, j'ai encore pris une grosse claque aujourd'hui.
''what you learn in the afternoon must work for you that evening in the parking lot" Kelly Mc Cann

"despite what your mamma told you, violence does solve problems." Ryan Job

31 juillet 2010 à 12:15:10
Réponse #62

Lemuel


salut !

Comme je ne suis ni sage ni homme de bien, mais jeune con et roublard, et que j'aime bien Patrick,
et que en plus je n'en suis qu'à la moitié du chemin, pas en combat mais en pédagogie, je ne vois pas l'inutilité de la chose, et je continue.   ::):-[ :'(    :D

Salut Gizmo !

Je te conseille la lecture de ces liens.

http://www.neurocombat.com/self%20defense%20neurocombat%20article%2002.html

http://www.neurocombat.com/self%20defense%20neurocombat%20article%2003.html

http://www.neurocombat.com/self%20defense%20neurocombat%20article%2009.html

http://www.neurocombat.com/self%20defense%20neurocombat%20article%2007.html
Don't watch the tool, the work it can do
Watch the man that's behind, yeah !


http://natureandforcefield.tumblr.com

31 juillet 2010 à 13:22:06
Réponse #63

** Serge **


Citation de: Lee Morrison
http://www.urbancombatives.com/martialcombatives.htm

     
What is the difference?
By Lee Morrison
 
Most of us within the combatives fraternity have heard the quote from Kelly MacCann where he defines the above question by saying something along the lines of ''the difference between martial arts and combatives, is that martial art is something that you do with someone, in other words there is this reciprocal exchange of movement going on where he does this and I react by doing that, whereas combatives are something that you do to someone or on someone. In other words I am going to take this sack of potatoes and just beat on it!''
There is no sparring, fencing or reciprocal exchange of blows the physical action on your part is completely one sided. I think Kelly's statement sums it up very well. It points to the mindset and well defined goal of the combatives trainee; that is to be single minded in your objective to defeat the enemy.

Combatives were born out of real experience and designed purely to counter violence. Any method that worked by doing just that, was considered combative. I would like to touch on the subject in a little more depth. Let's start by looking at the martial arts as they are practiced today both in the traditional sense and within the field of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) and combat sport. The latter has produced athletes of amazing levels of physical and mental prowess, nothing can be taken away from these modern day warriors who practice Vale Tudo, NHB and cage fighting extreme, they are truly immense within the field of what they do. But what they do is in one way or another governed by certain rules pertaining to certain dos and don'ts that define a sporting spectacle. Such matches don't include the pre-conflict 'interview' stage, which consists of conflict indicators and possible criminal acts. When one person scores the final point or the bell rings, the fighters are automatically separated, therefore the match will also lack the post-conflict stage, in which an escape, citizens arrest or police involvement may take place. The outcome of the match will dictate a winner and a loser, but this is not a life or death struggle nor is it a matter of self preservation. Real fights unfold rapidly and offer virtually no preparation time, over loading the mind with information requiring split second decisions to survive. They often include multi tasking such as protecting others, defending against a weapon, deploying your own weapon, communicating with others and so on. This is miles removed from the sporting arena. Looking at the martial arts in the more traditional sense; practicing martial art for arts sake will in my opinion have a lot to offer the trainee. Most will give you a solid foundation from which to build along with teaching you physical aspects such as correct body mechanics, natural bodily weapon formation, physical conditioning, attributes of speed, balance, co-ordination, and power along with discipline and self confidence etc. If your aim is to practice for fitness and recreational activity they are a perfect choice.

If your aim is to gauge your own progress and development then most traditional systems will provide you with a yard stick in the form of a grading system. If competition is your thing then most traditional systems can offer you that aspect also. Not forgetting also that most systems will also make mention of the self-defence element that their system as a martial art contains. So it would appear that the martial arts are indeed multi tasking activities that have a lot to offer any trainee prepared to put forth the effort and time that it takes to learn them. The problems arise when an individual who has no experience of real violence finds him/her self in a potentially violent confrontation for the first time in their lives and then tries to bring to bear the said self-defence element; out from the traditional dojo setting from where it was developed and into the harsh and unforgiving realities of the urban street setting. Only to find that what they have simply doesn't work. The reality gap between the street and the dojo environment is simply too vast. That's not to say that the skills of the martial artist won't work against the potential street aggressor, they can, have and will, just not without first having been adapted to meet and cater for the conditions of the urban setting. Take a look at W.E. Fairbairn's research he looked at all of the Eastern systems available to him at that time (during the 1920's in Shanghai China a time when Shanghai was considered to be the most violent City on earth) and he took the time and trouble to study whilst adding certain elements from street fighting and Western bar brawling along with some dirty tactics all of which he took out into the field in order to pressure test exactly what worked and what didn't. After doing this for a period of time he came to the conclusion that there was a need to taper and whittle away the unessential parts of what he had learned, a need to compress the curriculum to a few basic methods that would consistently work under the stress of fear, disorientation and confusion and a need to become as he himself said; ''Attack minded and dangerously so!'' These conclusions were born out of real experience. The reason that the self-defence element fails in most cases is three fold. First and foremost if the trainee has never been in a real violent confrontation before, chances are that he or she will never have experienced the adrenal stress that accompanies the same. Bearing in mind that the training methods presented by most martial arts instructors are ninety nine percent technique and skill based, there is a good chance that the adrenal stress part of the equation will not even have been addressed in passing conversation let alone replicated through scenario training. The next thing relates to the actual physical skills or the techniques employed most of which are designed to be used against a practitioner within the same style or system and have in no way been adapted for use against an unpredictable and non-compliant street attacker. Finally there is the most important mental aspect that of MINDSET, which sits at the core of any functional combatives program of which will consist of ninety percent ATTITUDE, INTENTION, and the WILLINGNESS to step up and do whatever it takes to win. This is for me the essence of what combatives are all about and this is where the main difference between martial art and combatives lie. But as any look into history will show, it has not always been this way. Just take a look at the meaning for the word Martial; it is a warring term. Indeed martial arts were designed to be used in war. They were designed to be very much combative. Take a look at the Samurai warrior. Look at the writings of Musashi; a true martial artist in every sense of the term in his classic text the book of five rings you will see examples that will lead you to the conclusion that Musashi's martial strategy was about as combative as it gets. Look further into some of the documented evidence of the old Filipino masters of Escrima and Kali who would fight in challenge matches to the death with the tools of their trade a stick or a bladed weapon.

Here evidence clearly shows how a warrior who was capable of the most flamboyant visual display of his art would have compressed his curriculum to a few basic methods of employing their weapons such as cutting or striking their opponent's hand to defang the snake and disarm their opponent of their weapon followed by a strike with the stick or a thrust with the knife which would in the majority of cases, ended the encounter right there. This came from the single minded combative purpose; to defeat the enemy (MINDSET). So at what point in time did the martial arts that we see today become less combative? Well post World War 2 society were for good reason, sick of war and violence and a lot of the tried and tested methods of Close Combat started to become obsolete, put away out of sight and out of mind. Other changes came to the fore when for example; the father of modern day judo, Jigoro Kano introduced a stream lined and adapted form of his art to be introduced as a sporting activity to Japan's school curriculum later to become the Olympic sporting games event that we see today. Previously judo was a lot more combative, with it's emphasise on blow before throw and the heavy inclusion of atemi waza (striking techniques.) Pre-war judo and ju-jitsu were indeed brutal arts before the sporting aspect was introduced to Japan and the rest of the world. That's not to take anything away from the art of judo as it is practiced today. The combative aspects are still within, just take a look at the methods of strangulation, and imagine some of the bone crushing throws taking place on a paved or cobbled street instead of a mat and you'll get the picture. Further examples include the art of karate-do that has been practiced in the West since before the sixties. As much as this fine art has to offer in terms of traditional foundation it is miles removed from the karate-jitsu, one strike, one kill methods of the old Okinawan masters as many of the true applications of kata (Bunkai) have revealed through recent research. Through out the decades we have seen various phases within the martial arts media rise and fall. Kung-fu of the 70's, ninjitsu of the 80's along with kick boxing and sport karate in various forms. Taekwondo was drawn into the Olympic games and the 90's saw Brazilian ju-jitsu and grappling take the world by storm this along with the introduction of NHB competition continue to be major pioneers for cross training and practitioners of the Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) still popular today. All of these things have had their place in time and all of them have had something to offer but they are still not combative in the true self-preservation sense of the word. It is true that Self-defence (a term I dislike) does come under the same umbrella as the martial arts, but true Self-Protection skills are miles apart from martial art in the traditional sense and combatives are at the extreme end of the Self-Protection scale, though all are interrelated in some way as we have seen. So what makes a system combative? How will such a curriculum differ from its traditional counter part? A modern combative system should consist of two parts; a competent instructor and a functional pressure tested curriculum. The following points are indications that you are moving in the right direction.
· An emphasis on avoiding confrontations an option made possible through the development of a heightened state of awareness.

· Pre-emption in the form of a continuous attack using gross motor strikes that will eliminate the threat if avoidance is not possible.

· An emphasis on natural every day positions as a fighting stance from where you can control space and become ballistically offensive in a heart beat.

· Emphasis on MINDSET and the WILLINGNESS to do whatever it takes to win.

· Basic strikes that will work both pre-emptively and as well as reactively.

· Skills and tactics that will work under the stress of disorientation, confusion and fear.

· Plenty of ATP anaerobic and task orientated fitness training in order to develop mental toughness.

· An understanding of adrenal stress and operational performance under stress.

· Discussion about the moral and legal use of force.

· An emphasis on heavy impact and contact to train muscle memory.

· Simple effective counters to common street attacks.

· Brutal ground fighting techniques.
· An emphasis on dirty fighting and tactics.

· Regular practice of improvised weapons

· A curriculum that can be adapted for use for a real world Operative such as a law enforcement officer and Close Protection Operatives as well as for civilian Self-Protection.

· Regular simulation and scenario stress training using protective equipment and realistic role play.
What can the combatives trainee expect to gain from such a system? A complete novice training within a good combatives program with a competent instructor and a good curriculum, containing all of the said elements, will become a capable individual within a relatively short period of time depending upon the individual's capacity to learn. Combatives were designed to be easy to learn, workable and retainable under the symptoms of stress, fear, and confusion. To quote Kelly MacCann again, who said;
''what you learn in the afternoon must work for you that evening in the parking lot.''
All actions are simple gross motor movements learned through repetition to a point of unconscious competence. Therefore a complete novice without any previous training or live experience of violence will still become functional in combatives within a short period of time. If you are lucky enough to find an instructor that applies modern learning technologies such as NLP to his instruction then you will compress the time it takes to become proficient even further. Then there is the kind of trainee who comes into combatives from a previous martial arts and/or a combat sports background. In such an example, he or she will already have a good foundation from which to build and will, due to the attributes already acquired, also become adept over a short space of time. Add to this some real world experience of violent confrontation either from encounters during adolescence or from experience working within an environment common to aggressive behaviour, working the doors for example. Then the said student will now through real experience, have already covered a lot of the psychological side too. In my opinion such an individual will bring a lot of talent and ability to his/her combative table. I'm speaking more in the sense of attributes developed as opposed to techniques collected. Please understand that I am by no means saying that a complete novice must first have such a foundation in order to become adept in this game. As I have already said the trainee will achieve a fair degree of competence over a short period. This is after all, how combatives of WW2 were taught i.e. to make the operative completely operational in a very short time period, sometimes a matter of mere hours. What I am saying is that if the trainee has built previous foundation upon foundation coupled with the active learning from real experience (even replicated scenario training will count as real experience to a fair degree) then such a trainee coming into combatives will without doubt, be on the road to becoming the best they can be. From my own experience based around twenty five years of training in an array of martial systems both Eastern and Western along with the experience gained from working the doors for over a decade and from the regular pressure testing of the combatives training that I practice, I can tell you that I am more proficient as both an instructor and a student as a result of that experience. In the big picture of things I know personally that I am still travelling the journey of my learning curve and still have much to learn. But in my humble opinion I feel that such foundation obtained by the trainee who now practices modern day combatives will bring the combatives fraternity into the new millennium as pioneers for the future.
"The quality of your life is a direct reflection of the quality of your communication with yourself and others." - Anthony Robbins
http://jahozafat.com/0029585851/MP3S/Movies/Pulp_Fiction/dicks.mp3
"Communications without intelligence is noise; Intelligence without communications is irrelevant." ~ Gen. Alfred. M. Gray, USMC

31 juillet 2010 à 14:03:38
Réponse #64

jonjobo



Est t-il possible d'avoir des liens de video de self (sans couteaux) intéressantes et représentatif du travail que vous faites svp?




31 juillet 2010 à 15:34:58
Réponse #66

Lemuel


T'es de très bonne humeur, dis-moi, aujourd'hui, Serge…
Don't watch the tool, the work it can do
Watch the man that's behind, yeah !


http://natureandforcefield.tumblr.com

31 juillet 2010 à 16:51:51
Réponse #67

** Serge **


Citer
It's Not a Matter of Who is Right.....

by Carl Cestari



"People here may belittle sports arts...."

Who?

Almost EVERY "combatives" man of any note CAME from a combative sports background. Boxing, wrestling, judo. WEF and O'Neill (SIXTH DAN-Kodokan Judo-personal student of Uchijima Sensei, a NEWAZA LEGEND) are PRIME examples of this.

But HERE'S a BETTER contemporary example:

Damian Ross.

Mention his name in wrestling circles here in Jersey. HE IS A LEGEND! Go to Yonezuka's Dojo(one of the BEST in the WORLD) and watch Damian randori against TOP level competition. Go to ZENSHIN Dojo and "hang" with him for one of his PT workouts(the man does NOT KNOW the meaning of the word QUIT!). AND THEN........ask him to teach "self defense". See what he teaches.

I'll SAY it AGAIN. What a 20 or 25 year old young buck and what a middle aged businessman seek to get out of their training are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

As far as the "effectiveness" of ANY technique, well a FIGHT is a FIGHT. I know a guy who got his head split open from a blow with a lead pipe. Know what? HE STILL beat the shit out of the TWO assholes. SO WHAT?

You FIGHT like hell until either YOU'RE DONE or HE'S DONE.

AND why is it so hard to "get" that "close combat" is far MORE than "ax hands" and "tiger's claws". It's ANYTHING THAT WORKS. Cracking someones "egg" with a blackjack is close combat. "Kneecapping" some asshole with a bat or ax-handle is close combat. Working some street punk over with "knucks" or "sap" gloves is close combat. Using a shiv, push dagger, or a friggin' ball point pen is close combat. A steaming hot cup of coffee right in the mug is CLOSE COMBAT.

I "know" guys who have DECADES of training in sporting combatives. YEARS of competitive experience and TONS of knowledge. KNOW WHAT? Screw with them and the LAST thing they are gonna think about is ANY "unarmed" mano a mano response.

As far as "building" attributes? OF COURSE! Athletics in GENERAL build many fine and useful attributes. BUT....I know of MANY instances were individulas with NO athletic background AT ALL have overcome TREMENDOUS odds. I have also witnessed "champions" who were hell on wheels in the ring, and on the mat FOLD like the proverbial "cheap suit" when the rubber met the road for real. SO WHAT?

But here's the REAL issue at the bottom of this ongoing debate.

Someone who has spent years training in "karate" has invested time, money, and maybe blood sweat and tears in his pursuit. He WANTS to believe that what he has invested so much in will WORK. Same for Kung Fu. Same for Aikido. Same for BJJ. Same for Boxing. Same for Wrestling. Same for Judo. Same for Savate. Same for FMA. SAME FOR ANY ENDEAVOR.

But that ONLY makes sense in the PARAMETERS of that SPECIFIC endeavor. Competitive Judoka expect to compete within the well defined "rules" of THAT endeavor. They DO NOT expect to enter a shiai and be knifed in the guts by the other competitor. A boxer enters the ring and expects to fight under the agreed rules of the boxing commission. He DOES NOT expect to be shot dead from across the ring by his opponent.

Let's say you're a top level collegiate wrestler. By circumstances beyond your control(real life does that) you have to face several desperate well armed foes. You're given a "choice". Attempt to use your wrestling skills at which you are VERY GOOD, or grab a 12gauge riot shotgun.

Now let's say you're at a relatives wedding. The booze is flowing pretty good and Uncle Vinny gets a little out of control. Same choice as above. Use your wrestling skills to restrain old Uncle Vinny or grab the riot gun?

I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS about "style", "system", or any of that CRAP. WHY? Because ALL I AM INTERESTED IN is what will SAVE MY ASS in the real world, when it's for all the marbles. I have spent YEARS in Judo, I get attacked for REAL and I grab a brick and pound the skel into mush. DAMN! I didn't get to use my Judo! OR....I get grabbed from behind and manage to toss the skel to the ground with O-Goshi, THEN I finish him with the brick. SO WHAT?

If a "tiger's claw" works GREAT! If "hadaka jime" works GREAT! If a kick to the balls works GREAT! If a takedown works GREAT! If running the bastards down with my car works GREAT!

Anyone out there "getting" this! IT AIN'T ABOUT what is or isn't "BETTER" or more "EFFECTIVE". ANYTHING THAT SAVES YOUR ASS IS GOOD!

It's NOT a matter of who is "right", only of who is "left"!
"The quality of your life is a direct reflection of the quality of your communication with yourself and others." - Anthony Robbins
http://jahozafat.com/0029585851/MP3S/Movies/Pulp_Fiction/dicks.mp3
"Communications without intelligence is noise; Intelligence without communications is irrelevant." ~ Gen. Alfred. M. Gray, USMC

31 juillet 2010 à 17:00:44
Réponse #68

Sieg



 Merci pour les vidéos Serge !! Celle des Ninja albanais m'a trop fait rire au début et puis apres quelques minutes.... :up:

 En tout cas tu viens de m'ouvrir les yeux sur quelque chose : ce dont j'ai besoin c'est plus d'un partenaire d'entrainement dispo et ouvert d'esprit que d'une structure/club ou apprendre une discipline... :)

 Jilucorg, Ulysse, envie de se faire des sessions SD sur les berges du Rhone  ;D ???

31 juillet 2010 à 17:58:28
Réponse #69

sharky


:blink:


Il fait référence, je pense, à la vidéo de Carl Cestari par rapport à la qualité de l'image.

Sieg, renseigne toi sur Cestari avant de le traiter de ninja albanais. J'entends des combatives préparer des bâches et des pelles, tiens çà sonne chez toi. ;#
C'est de l'humour hein.
« Modifié: 31 juillet 2010 à 20:12:58 par sharky »
''what you learn in the afternoon must work for you that evening in the parking lot" Kelly Mc Cann

"despite what your mamma told you, violence does solve problems." Ryan Job

31 juillet 2010 à 19:49:44
Réponse #70

jonjobo


merci pour les vidéos.
Je pratique (entre autre) un jujutsu traditionnel qui a ses racines au Japon. C'est ma pratique principale. J'ai eu l'occasion de rencontrer en Europe et au Japon des Shihan exceptionnels.
Pour les vidéos en question, cela reflète bien  les stages de selfs que j'ai fréquenté. Pour ma part, avec mon bagage et ma pratique, rien de transcendant qui n'ai déjà été vu.
Je pense qu'au delà de l'opposition "arts martiaux vs self" s'est surtout la qualité de l'enseignant qui prime. Dire par ex. que le kyokushin ne prépare pas à une agression contrairement à la self n'a pas de sens.

Je connais par ex. un enseignant de self qui redemande  chaque fois les mêmes explications lors de nos rencontres car certains principes ne sont pas acquits, un autre qui a pondu une méthode "moderne" type self défense et qui après être passé quelques temps chez nous utilise cette publicité pour légitimer ses connaissances en jujutsu!
Donc il y a vraiment à boire et à manger.
Il est également vrais que les dojos de qualité ou l'on forme des "combattants" sont rares, mais je pense pas plus que ceux de self.
Donc pour moi, oui les arts martiaux "traditionnels" préparent bien à se défendre", oui on y travail le mental, des attaques à plusieurs, etc etc, et oui,  au delà de la pratique, trouver un enseignant de qualité est souvent LE parcours du combattant.

31 juillet 2010 à 20:06:57
Réponse #71

Gizmo


Merci pour tous ces liens, ils snot super interessants et constructifs. :doubleup:

A étudier...

31 juillet 2010 à 20:19:24
Réponse #72

Sieg



Sieg, renseigne toi sur Cestari avant de le traiter de ninja albanais. J'entends des combatives préparer des bâches et des pelles, tiens çà sonne chez toi. ;#
C'est de l'humour hein.

 Haha! t'inquiete pas Sharky, pas besoin de ce genre de précisions avec moi, L'humour c'est la vie  :doubleup:

 
Ninja albanais ........  ;#
Quelque part, j'aime bien.
Faudra que j'en parle à Ralph et à Clint.

 Content que tu aimes !! je t'avoue que j'avais un peu peur que tu réagisse comme les combatives de Sharky  ;#

31 juillet 2010 à 21:04:45
Réponse #73

sharky


la derniere video de lee sur son site est pas mal du tout ;#.

j'adore quand le gars le croise dans la douche :lol:

Tain, j'avais pas vu qu'il y a des photos compromettantes du séminaire à Tours nottament de ceux qui prennent visiblement un certain plaisir à tabasser un type au sol. ;#
En fait, c'est bizarre, j'ai souvenir de ne pas avoir apprécié 'exercice et l'avoir fait à contre coeur (simulation de passage à tabac 1 contre 20) et fait j'ai la grosse banane sur la photo. :o

Sinon, Jeff, j'arrive pas à trouver la vidéo avec la douche, tu peux mettre un lien Stp?
''what you learn in the afternoon must work for you that evening in the parking lot" Kelly Mc Cann

"despite what your mamma told you, violence does solve problems." Ryan Job

31 juillet 2010 à 21:11:38
Réponse #74

Lemuel


Don't watch the tool, the work it can do
Watch the man that's behind, yeah !


http://natureandforcefield.tumblr.com

 


Keep in mind

Bienveillance, n.f. : disposition affective d'une volonté qui vise le bien et le bonheur d'autrui. (Wikipedia).

« [...] ce qui devrait toujours nous éveiller quant à l'obligation de s'adresser à l'autre comme l'on voudrait que l'on s'adresse à nous :
avec bienveillance, curiosité et un appétit pour le dialogue et la réflexion que l'interlocuteur peut susciter. »


Soutenez le Forum

Les dons se font sur une base totalement libre. Les infos du forum sont, ont toujours été, et resteront toujours accessibles gratuitement.
Discussion relative au financement du forum ici.


Publicité