PDA

View Full Version : Most general (well-rounded) martial art form - NOT "Best"



Timber Wolf
07-29-2004, 03:44 PM
I am by no stretch of the imagination a Martial Artist. I took some Karate from a friend who was teaching while in college. Unfortunately he had to start charging, and being a poor, starving college student, I couldn't afford it.

In any event, with that preamble out of the way... I've seen lots of threads (not here) on what's the "Best" MA. I don't believe there is a "best." What I am wondering though is, is there one that is more well-rounded than most others. Please don't turn this into a "my form is better than your form" contest. I realize that there's different strokes for different folks.

I think I personally would lean toward Aikido, or Jujitsu (as I understand them). But am looking to learn more about what other forms (as well as these two). I can not afford to take any classes right now, so that it out of the question, so please don't even suggest that I reconsider my priorities and my budget - just can't be done right now - PERIOD. End of that.

Steve Camp
07-29-2004, 04:06 PM
My Opinion, and I would have to qualify this as a largely ignorant, uneducated, non-martial-artist connessiour:

Jeet Kune Do
Krav Maga

Al Lipscomb
07-29-2004, 07:57 PM
Most, if not all, "martial arts" lack a great deal in technique that would apply in a real defensive situation. I may be splitting hairs but Krav Magna is more of a system designed for actual defensive use. It has some fluff and people stick stuff onto it but the core is very good.


I like Arnis and some of the other FMA stuff but it all depends on your focus.

Skpotamus
07-29-2004, 08:53 PM
The problem with most martial arts is that they hold onto tradition a little too much and sacrifice realism.

For effectiveness, I still lean toward the "sport oriented" martial arts. Such as boxing, Muay Thai, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. Arts that are tested regularly against another skilled fighter. However, all of those arts leave large gaps in your skill sets needed. Such as weapons, multiple attackers, etc.

Honestly, I haven't seen too many well rounded places out there. And those few that were, were taught by police trainers and former police officers. People that threw away a lot of the crap they were taught in traditional martial arts. I guess you could call that Jeet Kune Do.

I would recommend looking for a school like that, one run by a former police hand to hand instructor ( a real one), or a former police officer that actually had to use the things he/she teaches.

Wodan
07-30-2004, 06:27 AM
ONE well-rounded MA is Muay Thai (Thai kick boxing - not aerobics with gloves). Why?

Punches and kicks
Hard, realistic training/sparring (get used to violence)
limited throws
physical fitness

I have never studied it so I'm not biased there.

Weaknesses I see in Muay Thai:

No weapons
No grappling
fight with gloves

Still, a good Muay Thai fighter should clean up in a brawl.

Bottom line is you need to be:

FIT
Used to violence
Skilled with punches and kicks
Skilled at grappling / ground fighting
Skilled with weapons

Probably in something close to that order...

A fit guy used to "mixing it up" but no formal MA training will probably win against your average MA "Black Belt". I said average....

Pick a MA that includes real sparring, get good at it and then take another MA that focuses on areas the first did not emphasize. Oh yeah, and did I mention getting in shape? :)

Lou Costello
07-30-2004, 08:19 AM
Boxing.

Develops strength, stamina, endurance, and toughness.

Timber Wolf
07-30-2004, 12:53 PM
....

Honestly, I haven't seen too many well rounded places out there. And those few that were, were taught by police trainers and former police officers. People that threw away a lot of the crap they were taught in traditional martial arts. I guess you could call that Jeet Kune Do.

I would recommend looking for a school like that, one run by a former police hand to hand instructor ( a real one), or a former police officer that actually had to use the things he/she teaches.

Probably one of the reasons I've been thinking about this (at least a reason on the subconcious level) is that I went to our sheriff dept's Citizen's Academy, and they went over personal defense. And that is one of the things they did talk about was how to learn what you needed and throw out the traditional bowing, and chanting, etc. Plus the trainer for the dept talked about how they use a bunch of different styles, Krav Maga being one of the styles. Also, what is JKD?


Thanks for all the replies guys.

TW

John Woo
07-30-2004, 01:28 PM
TimberWolf,

Your question is a good one. I think "What is the most well rounded martial art" depends upon you... Your inate physical build, reflexes, mind, and "way" of movement. I know this sounds loose, but you should take many different styles - learn from many different schools. Then, keep what works for you.

Just as an example, personally I am not a physically big guy, so while I have studied ground fighting, it is not my strong point - bigger guys simply have an advantage here. In order for me to prevail in ground fighting, my skill must be much greater by a significant amount from a bigger guy. So, for me, I have concentrated more on joint manipulations, point strikes, and shorter, much faster movements. In addition, my "reach" is not a great a some fighters, so I study more "close" in martial skills.

Learn many different styles, then use what is best suited for you - and at a later level, more suited to overcoming your opponent.

John Woo

Rainmaker
07-30-2004, 02:00 PM
Personally I buy into the theory that there are no superior martial arts only superior practioners.

To be well rounded you need a base to start from. You can start as a stand up fighter or a ground fighter and then you will have to supplement your training to become 'well rounded'.

I choose to go the stand up route to start. I have trained Kajukenbo and Goju Ryu. Both have joint locks and takedowns in addition to striking and kicking. In Kajukenbo we did some ground work, which was enough to help against an unskilled opponent but not enough to help against a skilled BJJ guy.

The instructor is key. Both of my instructors have been law enforcement guys and their ability to relate what was being taught to a street confrontation made a huge difference.

You said you may be looking at Aikido or Jujitsu. My 2 cents is to go for Jujitsu. I have looked at Danzan Ryu style of Jujitsu (www.danzan.com) which has not only joint manipulation but does add in striking as you move up in rank.

michael
07-31-2004, 10:51 AM
WWII combatives as taught by Applegate, Fairbarin, Sykes, Cestari and McCann.

Kobra
08-01-2004, 03:23 PM
Jujitsu seemed to work for Hoyce Gracie <spelling> when I watched him win a couple of UFC titles. He was by no means a large fellow, but one he would get a hold of the bigger guys he could choke them out. Seeing that the majority of fights end up on the ground this may be a good option. Before it gets there as my grandfather would say, "If you can pick up something to hit a guy with other than your fist, do it."

Man, this is a great forum!

Kobra

michael
08-01-2004, 06:46 PM
Brazilian JuJitsu is great for the UFC, but the last thing you want to do in a streetfight is roll around on the asphalt amid broken bottles and rocks trying to submit someone while his buddies have a boot party on your head. Bad idea for the street. However, BJJ is great for conditioning and getting you used to contact, just don't count on using it in a real fight.

Buford
08-01-2004, 09:48 PM
I'm a street cop in a bad neighborhood in a big city. I've been in a LOT of good old fashoined knock-down-drag-out fights.
BJJ IS great for street fighting. Granted, my first choice is not to be on the ground in a street fight, but most fights end up there. Many of the ground techniques also work standing up. Combine BJJ with some boxing or Muy Thai training and you will have a definite edge over 99% of the bad guys you meet.

Kobra
08-01-2004, 11:27 PM
I'm a street cop in a bad neighborhood in a big city. I've been in a LOT of good old fashoined knock-down-drag-out fights.
BJJ IS great for street fighting. Granted, my first choice is not to be on the ground in a street fight, but most fights end up there. Many of the ground techniques also work standing up. Combine BJJ with some boxing or Muy Thai training and you will have a definite edge over 99% of the bad guys you meet.

Yeah, that was the crux of my point. Nobody WANTS to roll around in glass, but more often than not that is what happens (probably 100% of the fights I've seen end that way). I can't recall a fight that didn't end up on the ground. Hell, why are refs in boxing matches always prying guys apart? If they didn't have gloves on they'd be wrestling.

;-) Kobra

michael
08-02-2004, 06:54 AM
Well, I was a street cop for 12 years and I have to disagree. Most police fights end up on the ground because that's where we take them down to cuff them. I say "most" but by far not "all". I was in more fights than I can count, and many of them did NOT go to the ground, even as a police officer. The ones that did go to the ground were because that's where I wanted them and there were no other "buddies" of his around.The fights that did end up on the ground were not "on the ground" in a BJJ sense of the words. Mostly they ended up with the BG face down and me cuffing him from kneeling on his back. Civilians are a different animal altogether. As a civilian, you should not go down to the ground with your attacker. If you do, you open yourself up to attack from his buddies or interested bystanders--it's suicide. Do we need to have a knowledge of BJJ and how to defend against it? Absolutely, but it shouldn't make up the crux of our training for SD purposes. For the same reasons I don't believe it is what the police or military should be using. You cannot contend with multiple attackers on the ground. We must know how to fight against it but shouldn't rely on it for SD. Boxing and Muay Thai is great, IF you work multiple attacker and weapons scenarios into the mix.

cyril
08-02-2004, 09:02 AM
BJJ is not enough for a real fight but to survive a street fight you have to train everything:punch kick ,elbows knees , take down and ground fighting.

Kobra
08-02-2004, 09:54 AM
It really is an interesting discussion. I carry a gun and knife with me everywhere I go which obligates me to run if possible or draw if absolutely necessary. Fighting with a gun strapped on means that there is a possibility I can be rendered unconscious and disarmed. Don't know if I'd want to take that chance.

Kobra

michael
08-02-2004, 11:18 AM
Fighting should always be a last resort. I will plead ignorance, apologize, run or whatever I have to do to avoid it. When I was a cop, I looked for and enjoyed fighting. I no longer have that luxury.:) If I fight now, it will not be over some "slight" or because someone pissed me off, it will be because someone wants to harm my family, friends, self or others and there is no alternative. If this happens, I will fight as if I am in a fight unto death and will treat it as such.

sionaprhys
08-02-2004, 11:53 AM
I'll cast another vote for jeet kune do. Some of the jujutsu styles include a fair amount of striking. Some of the Kali forms are pretty complete. Some of the Okinawan karate styles include throws and grappling. Kuk sul won, hapkido, etc. include a variety of techniques. A lot of the modern eclectic styles are quite well rounded.

Buford
08-02-2004, 07:33 PM
"Well, I was a street cop for 12 years and I have to disagree. Most police fights end up on the ground because that's where we take them down to cuff them. I say "most" but by far not "all". I was in more fights than I can count, and many of them did NOT go to the ground, even as a police officer. The ones that did go to the ground were because that's where I wanted them and there were no other "buddies" of his around"

Most of the above is true, however, the fight that you have to train for is the guy that is either (a) kicking your butt standing up and you NEED to go to ground, or (b)the guy that THROWS you to the ground.
Being on your back in a street fight is not a place you want to be, but BJJ turns it to your advantage.
Let me reiterate that I firmly beleive in having a strong standup game as well as a strong ground game.

"You cannot contend with multiple attackers on the ground. We must know how to fight against it but shouldn't rely on it for SD. Boxing and Muay Thai is great, IF you work multiple attacker and weapons scenarios into the mix."

You also SHOULD NOT contend with multiple attackers standing up. The best system for multiple attackers is gun jitsu. If you weight 200 lbs and are fighting two guys who each weigh 150 lbs, you are facing an opponent that not only outweighs you by 100 lbs, but is also a beast with four arms, four legs, and is capable of being in two places at once. Not an opponent I'd like to face. (and I do enjoy a good fight!)
Multiple attacker and weapons scenarios (excepting the two little old ladies swinging their purses at you) should usually be dealt with with the above referenced gun jitsu system.

michael
08-02-2004, 07:56 PM
Yup, you gotta know both. I'm just not going to the ground if I can help it--been there, done that but prefer to stand thank you very much!

Guns are great too and I always carry, however, we have to be prepared for multiples when we are armed and unarmed. Like Kurt Russell said in Tombstone--"Your friends might get me in a rush, but not before I turn your head into a canoe". It's the rush I train for after I've shot one or two--you just never know.

czeska
08-03-2004, 09:52 PM
...And that is one of the things they did talk about was how to learn what you needed and throw out the traditional bowing, and chanting, etc. Also, what is JKD?

JKD is "Jeet Kune Do", and is the term people use to refer to either (1) school's that claim some kind of affiliation with Bruce Lee, and/or (2) Bruce Lee's martial arts philosophy. See references to Jeet Kune Do at www.brucelee.com . Some pretty deep philosophical discourses that Bruce wrote.

After scrutinizing many different forms of martial arts, eastern and western alike (fencing, boxing, wing chun, karate, etc) Bruce Lee formed his martial arts philosophy which he called Jeet Kune Do ("JKD"). This philosophy was against rigid schools and systems of martial arts. He scorned patterns and repetitive training and blind loyalty to particular styles or schools of martial arts. He recognized the value of structure for teaching movement and basic skills, but not for advanced studies after the basic skills were learned or taught.

To quote him, "...it does not look at combat from a certain angle but from all possible angles because it is not based on any system... any structure, however efficiently designed, becomes a cage if the practitioner is obsessed with it. To define JKD as a style... is to miss it completely." (Bruce Lee, "Jeet Kune Do: Toward Liberation", http://www.brucelee.com/jeet.htm ).

Of course, it's ironic that JKD is often seen as Bruce Lee's school/style of martial arts. JKD schools can be found today. But my opinion is always that a good instructor is more important than a proven "school" or system.

There's a teacher around here whose students doesn't spar with other area schools, because other schools don't want to fight them. His students are very effective practical fighters, emphasis on natural movements, practical (not flashy) kicks and punches, grappling, ground fighting. They win fights, but they don't always look like Jet Li on a movie set. They won't win awards for pretty kicks and spins, but they know when to tangle, when to run away, and how to talk their way out of conflict. When they spar, they rarely connect with solid kicks or punches -- moving out-of-the-way is the preferred method of defense.

He teaches self-defense, not sport. The instructor is more important than the "school".

Kobra
08-03-2004, 10:43 PM
What is the name of the school, where is it located, and do they have a website?

Kobra

Demi Barbito
08-04-2004, 05:56 AM
Info on Jeet Kune Do:

http://www.demibarbito.com/objectify.html

Timber Wolf
08-04-2004, 11:28 AM
czeska thanks for the info on JKD. I thought it was affiliated With Bruce Lee, but wasn't sure. So from your comments

" To quote him, "...it does not look at combat from a certain angle but from all possible angles because it is not based on any system... any structure, however efficiently designed, becomes a cage if the practitioner is obsessed with it. To define JKD as a style... is to miss it completely." (Bruce Lee, "Jeet Kune Do: Toward Liberation", http://www.brucelee.com/jeet.htm ).

Of course, it's ironic that JKD is often seen as Bruce Lee's school/style of martial arts. JKD schools can be found today. But my opinion is always that a good instructor is more important than a proven "school" or system."

could I then say that any martial art could be taught with a JKD mindset? if the instructor so desired. If I start taking training it ain't gonna be for sport, and I don't want to spend all my time learning about a bunch of rules based a sport's ruling commision's decisions.

(looks like I opened a can of worms - in a good way, with this quesiton.)

Steve Camp
08-04-2004, 11:45 AM
could I then say that any martial art could be taught with a JKD mindset? if the instructor so desired. If I start taking training it ain't gonna be for sport, and I don't want to spend all my time learning about a bunch of rules based a sport's ruling commision's decisions.


IMO, yes, you could learn a particular art with a JKD mindset. However, I would argue that if you are truly applying the JKD mindset to that art, you will begin to separate the chaff from the wheat, so to speak, throwing out the fluff in that particular art, the stuff that does not work, or is BS. When you are done taking the good from that art, and then move on to apply the JKD mindset to other arts... when you are all said and done... you will end up with a system for lack of a better word, that will be similar to the JKD system of blocks, strikes, low kicks etc that Bruce Lee had developed. Had Lee not died, and if he were still with us today, and assuming his fame etc did not all go to his head... I think elements from other arts, such as Mua Thai (sp?), Brazilian Ju Juitsu, Krav Maga etc. would have found their way into JKD.

In some respects JKD can be boiled down to KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) combined with WWFY (What Works For You). Also, I suspect Krav Maga has a lot in common with JKD in that Krav Maga seems to incorporate only those gross motor skill moves that work. One possible differentiator might be that JKD might rely on moves that are not as simple (e.g. not pure Gross Motor Skill) as KM.

My $0.02.

michael
08-04-2004, 01:09 PM
JKD is more complicated than Krav. KM is about the simplest system I have seen to date, other than WWII combatives, which is my favorite. KM has a lot to offer, though I disagree with some of it.

Blade Doc
08-04-2004, 09:17 PM
The most “well rounded” martial art is the one that recognizes that any novice can grease an expert.

A BJJ expert gets into a streetfight with a novice, puts him down to the ground and pummels him. The BJJ expert gets up, victorious, and goes off touting the superiority of his martial art.

The next day, a pissed off and revenge seeking novice, grabs a shotgun and ambushes the BJJ expert as he walks to his martial arts class. There is no guard or fancy takedown that is going to stop that shotgun blast. BOOM! BOOM! Mr. BJJ is dead.

The cycle of violence in life, does not end with one street altercation, but continues.

The mindset of an individual is the real “delivery system,” not the physical characteristics which he develops or is born with naturally. And the physical characteristics of an individual do not express their inner being. Their attitude, poise and aura does.

How many of us have ran across, fit, athletic martial artists, whose minds were full of crap and cowardice?

You may think that you can takedown the big, fat guy across the room. You say, “That guy is big and fat. I am going to kick his big, fat arse.” Then you go and start a fight and BAM! the fat guy grabs you by the belt and jams a shank in your esophagus.

What’s the difference. You were going to fight, the fat guy was going to kill!

Authentic street altercations are of this nature.

If you are going to go by anything that Bruce Lee said, it should be that the man is more important than the system.

Forget the JKD and martial arts schools. Have the attitude that you are going to destroy any hideous, unjustifiable attacker you confront, even if it means losing your life in the process. The unjustified attacker gives up all privileges to his life when he seeks to take yours. Take his life, you own it. (No I’m not talking about mutual confrontations or verbal pissing matches that devolve to physical altercations)

When picking up a martial art or method of self-defense, pick up one that is conceptual. For example, the drawpoint or pikal method of reverse grip knife fighting dis completely conceptual. It will apply to many hand held objects like pencils, mini-mag lights etc... This is the stuff that you need for countering street violence. J. Keating or SNARC’s material contain this type of work.

If you decide to go the JKD route, you must take up Western fencing. Fencing will solve all those “complications” that people complain about in JKD. You will flow from Western fencing into JKD. It will be like a Duck Taking To Water. Few know this secret and few preach it.

Because JKD at its core is fencing modified for hand to hand combat. Go to any JKD school, they will bow to seven arts, like Savate, Muy Thai, Arnis, Gung fu- etc as the source of JKD... But they will never recognize fencing. They will talk about it fencing in passing, “Oh yeah, Bruce studied fencing and he adopted its footwork,” But there is much more to it than that.

They will talk about things in JKD like riposte, the beat, tempo, broken rhythm, the art of interception, five ways of attack, the hammer principle, but never pay homage to their source, fencing. You will understand these things when you have placed a sword in your hand and conducted sword play. Fencing will develop those attributes that many say were, “inherit to Bruce,” and can never be developed.

For example, Lee’s explosive handwork was influenced by the Western fencing concept that the hand should move before the foot. Sir Richard Burton, the famous explorer and fencer commented on this tactic:

“Whether your attack be simple or compound, ever remember what I here repeat: The movement of point and hand, together with the extension and elevation of the arm, must precede, though almost imperceptibly, the action of the body and the legs. This is an invariable rule. If your lower limbs begin the move you lose equilibrium, your lunge will give notice to the adversary, and your point will wander away from the mark.”

This principle is vital for a first strike and the non-telegraphic aspects of JKD. In JKD it mainly involves the lead interception hand.

You do not have to take up fencing or JKD to be effective in a fight. This is just a suggestion.

I also recommend getting Carl Cestari’s Fairbairn-Sykes material to start off with and get a copy of John Styers Cold Steel which has F-S hand to hand material and applies fencing to bayonet and knife fighting. Cold Steel will expand knowledge of H2H quickly.

The first thing you should learn in a good fencing salle is, “Beware of the novice, because they are unpredictable.”

michael
08-05-2004, 05:15 AM
Blade Doc makes excellent points. I concur on Carl Cestari's videos and Cold Steel by Styers. Both are required watching/reading for those serious about SD. Very few fights now are the typical unarmed encounters, but often involve weapons, including knives and guns. The last thing you want to do is roll around the ground with someone who is armed with a knife or has buddies waiting in the wings to have a boot party on your head.

hoplite
08-05-2004, 09:32 AM
a few random thoughts

1. The most well rounded martial art is a red herring. There are some Korean arts that combine strikes, kicks and throws which might make them the most well rounded. That doesnt mean that thtey are very usable in real life or even practical--they teach thngs like catching a knife in a wristlock.

2. I have seen a lot of people on line spouting the BJJ/NHB is the best and everything else sucks point of view. This isnt real life but I have seen them invade different forums.

3. Whats a delivery system?

4. Carl Cestari and Jim Grover have great tapes. Jim Grover is a name that Kelly Mccann used before he came public.

5. Any chance that Paul Sharp will be putting on an ISR or SBG workshop at the gettogether in Memphis associated with this board?

ISRAELI EXTREMIST
08-05-2004, 09:53 AM
I studied Tracys / Ed Parkers, Kenpo system for over 12 years, it is one of the most comprehensive systems that include every aspect of fighting which will be too long to describe here, when we asked Al Tracy what was the place of the marshall arts in todays world he always said it might be usefull if you forget your gun at home. We used to sparr and get very rough in full contact matches and after getting hurt and hurting others badly I realised that in the street I will never get into a fight unless I or my family was attacked and I had to do something about it and then I would have to go for it all the way because one bad hit or fall can kill you so any fight is for your life, the other reason that I shall not get into a fist fight is if you or your opponent gets cut, bit or blodied and he has some deadly disease and gives it to you then it is a death sentence for you, so the best system I know aside from a gun if it was not justified using your gun is PEPPER
SPRAY and get the hell out of there as fast as possible.
Using a gun could be justifieble if you were attacked by multiple opponents or an opponent that is much bigger and stronger then you or if he/they have any object in their hands
that could be used as a weapon.

Kobra
08-05-2004, 10:07 AM
What if the fella is unarmed but is simply bigger than you, and your object (your gun) could become his object? I don't think a reasonable person would have any choice but to end the confrontation. A bad guy prosecutor could have a field day with you, but you'd be alive.

Kobra

hoplite
08-05-2004, 10:50 AM
What if the fella is unarmed but is simply bigger than you, and your object (your gun) could become his object? I don't think a reasonable person would have any choice but to end the confrontation. A bad guy prosecutor could have a field day with you, but you'd be alive.

thats known as 'disparity of force' and is a recognized reason for justifying the use of a deadly weapon in self defense. It could be a bigger/stronger attacker or multiple attackers.

Blade Doc
08-08-2004, 10:52 PM
Any type of martial art that does not functionally instruct or tell its students to find instruction in the application of improvised and contemporary weapons is not “well rounded.” Thus the emphasis on weapons. Learning the art of Shank-Fu is fundamentally important. The prime element of Shank-Fu is not the weapon but the mental drive to utilize the weapon/unarmed moves in a vicious and unrelenting manner. Various legal, ethical and situational elements taken into consideration, of course.

Blade Doc
08-08-2004, 11:58 PM
Imagine someone walks up and challenges you to a dance contest. You accept. The two of you start to dance to the latest hip hop groove. The crowd is cheering you on and before you know it, BAM! You are the dance winner. You go up to your opponent and say, “You got served foo!”

Just as you are about to celebrate your latest hip hop dance victory with the hunies, the opponent, unhinged by fanatical hatred and jealousy, goes for a shiv and shanks you to death.
Ain’t no hip hop moves gonna stop that shank.

Our society has become unhinged by fanaticism. This fanaticism all too often unleashes itself at the point of a shank. We live in Shanksville. In Shanksville, the distinction between unarmed and armed combat is blurred and is forever blurring. “You may not be interested in the shank, but the shank is interested in you.”

The fat scallywag on the corner has got the drive to shank and the will to kill. He is going to bust out some Shank-Fu on people he intends to victimize or anyone that messes with him. He has the shank and thats all he needs.

Something else the fat scallywag knows, its safe for him to go to bars and other drunkard places that are on his turf, where his friends are, where he knows he will be backed up. In places that he is welcome and known, he has multiplied the power of his shank by ten. Now he has multiple people with their own shanks on his side. So if at least he is aware, he knows not to go to other drunkard vicinities outside his turf, and if he does to bring his shank.

Outside of his turf, outside his comfort zone, he still has the shank and the element of surprise and viciousness. In fact, our antagonist loves to travel to “nice neighborhoods” where he can easily victimize the emasculated, defenseless and sensitive sheeple. In all his gluttonous, the fat scallywag, holds many principle advantages over those he intends to victimize or shank in his path.

Prima Facia: someone who has a strong and alert mentality with extensive training and physical skills has a better shot surviving conflict and destroying the opponent. So it makes sense to develop training and physical skills. No one can dispute that. But that isn’t the end of the game.

Extreme mental drive creates the physical acceleration necessary for a quick kill. Anyone can pick up a shank and rush you. How much skill is in that? And in a cheating, conniving environment, that the scallywags of America grow up in, they will use the element of surprise and distraction in their rush. Not much to it, but effective as hell.

The rush can be modified into technically skillful expressions of physicality, like the Fencing Fleche. Deadly by design, the fleche will devastate most knife players in an instant, but again it is just a modified rush. Without the mental drive to impale your opponent on the tip of your blade, the fleche is meaningless.

Extreme mental drive, ferocity and a shank is enough to take down even those primed for self-defense. And this has nothing to do with luck. The fat skallywag does not partake in heavy exercising, endurance runs etc...etc... Yet his simple brand of Shank-Fu will defeat cops, trained self-defense people and especially sheeple. Simple in its complexity and yet complex in its simplicity.

In dangerous situations, genuine innocent people, with no martial arts training, who are not physically in shape, can turn themselves into killing machines by letting their primal instinct of self-preservation flow through their veins. Thats the point. A sharp object with the physical acceleration created by primal rage is a dangerous thing to face.