rugbyLEAGUEfan said:
There is a perception that people skilled in martial arts are disciplined with their skills and thus don't use them to generally be violent dickheads I.e purely used for self defense . Is this accurate or cliche ?
I think as a general rule that's true. Most people in general don't act like violent dickheads, so that's going for us, and confidence in ones abilities tends to mean one has less to prove. That said, as everywhere, there's a few rotten apples. These tend to be more noticeable in full contact styles like Muay Thai and MMA, but this is less because of Hollywood reasons about other styles "teaching control" and more because if you are a violent aggressive person, you're more likely to be interested in styles that let you hit people more.
In films and from what I have seen occasionally , elderly martial artists seem to maintain their skills better than say a boxer or tennis player . My 60 odd year old math teacher was awesome . What is it about martial arts that results in this ?
Well, first I would say that Boxing certainly is a form of Martial Arts! But that said, in general I think your point about skills as you age is true.
This is because Martial Arts tend to be a true full body exercise. Boxing and Tennis certainly give you a workout all over, however, they tend to focus on the same repetitive motions. Hence, Tennis Elbow and Boxer's Fraction. Boxing in particular, is terrible in the amount of stress and damage it puts on the brain. Martial Arts, especially broad styles, put stress on very different areas. This is how, for example, Randy Courture was able to be a professional fighter until the age of 47.
The other factor is a higher skill ceiling. Again, things like Boxing and Tennis focus on the same few motions, repeated over and over again. That's not to say mastering Boxing is easy, but that after a comparatively short amount of time, any increase in your skills is likely to be offset by a decrease in your fitness. Martial Arts covers a broader set of skill, so after 20 or 30 years, there's still notable areas to be improved, not so much for something like boxing.
Those guys that profess to using Qi are hoaxsters right ? Like with the no-contact punch.
The no-contact punch is
certainly a hoax. However some very reasonable schools do profess to use Qi, or Chi, or Ki. It's an unscientific term for something I think most athletes would agree matters. It's the ability to focus your 'energy' into a task. There's no supernatural explanation necessary for it, but many schools out of tradition will talk about this as "Qi" while other athletes will come up with other names for it.
How come you don't hear about people doing good ol' karate these days ? It's always Bosnian left footed jujitsu or something .
It's part of a process that's been going on at
least since the 19th century. Everyone always wants to get an edge, and one of the easiest ways to do this is to do something unexpected. Boxing and Wrestling competed for this in the 19th century, then came Jujitsu. Jujitsu was new and unexpected so few people, especially in normal conditions knew how to react to it. Karate came later in the 50s, along with Taekwondo, and later Kung Fu, all offering the same advantage: their techniques were unexpected, and so very effective. If no one expects a side kick, they're unlikely to offer much to stop it. But Karate and Kung Fu have been a part of mass culture just as long, and so a kick or a knife hand isn't so unexpected. So people move on to the next thing to give them a surprise advantage. Brazilian Jiujutsu is the biggest one in this field, since most people don't expect to be defeated by an opponent they have on their back. But everyone is always looking for something no one else has.
Can you catch a fly using chop sticks?
I'm lucky if I can catch them with my hand. Damn things are everywhere this year.
Do you work at a McDojo? Or if you are unsure: How many blackbelts (or equivalent) have you or your colleagues awarded in the past 5 years?
If that's the measurement, then yes, I have. Though it should be pointed out that a blackbelt means very different things in different systems. In Brazilian Jiu-Jutsu, it represents mastery of the style, while in Taekwondo it is only a signifier of basic competence.
Is there any reason for someone interested in self-defense to take TKD? Obviously its good exercise and may be fun, but not many people these days look highly on it as a form of self-defense.
I wouldn't recommend it highly for that purpose. But then, there are very few martial arts I would. If you're really concerned about Self-Defense, you're much better off taking specialized courses, which only focus on hand to hand combat in a small part. In a self-defense situation, you're better off focusing on simple tactics (go for peircing, eyes, and ears) or using an improvised weapon if you can.
Of course, usually when people ask about "self-defense" they mean "winning fights" and in the ring at least, it's won me fights.
I have never tried. I use chop sticks since I'm originally from Japan, but being Buddhist prohibits killing anything.
