The Easiest Martial Art to Learn for Self-Defense

[Sorry!]

90% of Martial Arts has to do with the master. Most people think Kung Fu is impracticle, and then some say Jujitsu isn't, then there are people who think Tae Kwon Do isn't. The problem is, the person who is teaching the student.

Now I have done a few martial arts, I have been a practictioner of both Thai Boxing and Tae Kwon Do for 7 years now and I have found some very awesome teachers. They showed me practicability, the physics behind it. Where to hit with maximum damage for maximum results, and used it on many occasions in Tournaments ( Sunshine Games, U.S Open, Cape Coral Martial Arts Institute ). All I am saying is that in Martial Arts there is a lot of garbage, but there is a lot of very nice techniques that do some wicked things. And if you guys don't believe in Dim Bok, knife hand strike someone ( Fingers first ) in the jugular.

Fight Science and Human Wrecking Ball have proved a lot of the theories and myths about Martial Arts. These people DO break bricks and concrete that is not weakened, not prestressed, without any fancy techniques, but pure brutal strength.

Because they were taught, and learned not from 'The Best' but from people who knew what they were talking about.

Why don't people ever look at the last date someone posted in a thread?

We should have a warning that tells the poster that the posts they are about to reply to is older than a set date(from last post). That way we can sort out who does it on purpose and who does it accidentally after searching for something.

++MMA is the way to go.

 

[Pattonias]

Woo hoo! really old thread.

This is a hazard of the Similar threads links on the bottom. I did this once before and ended up bumping something from several years ago. I check the dates now.

 

[7foldsofpaper]

There have been some pretty interesting fighting styles mentioned here that I've never heard of before. I appreciate good martial arts, but to tell you the honest I don't think that I'd want to choose anything like karate or muay thai if I was wanting to do a martial art. I'd want to do something that deals extensively with grappling and close quarter fighting. I just think that this would be the most realistic and most useful thing to learn.

Something that I've noticed a lot (especially on the internet) is that many people think that if they become a professional in a martial art they will be able to defend/take on anything. Some people even think that they can beat someone who has 40-50 kg on them. I mean if you take Jet Li in Fearless as an example. There is no way in hell that he'd win in a fight against that incredibly huge guy (they fight in a boxing ring). It'd be like hitting a wall pretty much and he wouldn't necessarily be as incredibly slow as he was in the movie. But after seeing that movie and many others like it, people believe that it is possible. Just amazes me really...

It is very possible to take on a person who is much larger-stronger on you. It is just how well you were taught to defend against an opponent. It only takes 1000 pounds per square inch to knock out an opponent in a head strike, smash the kidneys, destroy someones throat, and so on.

Knees are very easy to break if you know how to, a jumping front snap kick to anyone's noes with break it, a well chambered side to side hammer fist strike can break someone's sternum, and a well placed knife hand ( fingers first ) will break anyone's wind pipe.

The human body is filled with so many, if not hundreds of weak points, and some of them, no matter how hard you train will never be able to take a good strike.

A smaller frame ( if taught right ) will learn how to use momentum, such a plyometrics and rotation to generate velocity to strike at maximum power for maximum damage.

What I say, it depends on the master. We as martial artists put a lot of emphasis on the STUDENT, but if a student has a horrible MASTER, then they will never learn what is practical and what is impractical. What will work and what will not work in a situation. This is why we get into 'What martial art is best?' it is not the martial art, it is the person who is teaching this said martial art.

 

[7foldsofpaper]

a gun.

p.s.: never mind 10 characters padding

a well placed punch. It takes 0.8 seconds for a person to recognize a stimulus, it takes the average fighter 0.18 recognize a stimulus. Stimulus in this sense would be a gun, now by the time you recognize you can pull the trigger, we have already reacted. ;D

 

[DanP]

a well placed punch. It takes 0.8 seconds for a person to recognize a stimulus, it takes the average fighter 0.18 recognize a stimulus. Stimulus in this sense would be a gun, now by the time you recognize you can pull the trigger, we have already reacted. ;D

And you would be dead, and buried 6 feet under.

 

[FredGarvin]

It is very possible to take on a person who is much larger-stronger on you. It is just how well you were taught to defend against an opponent. It only takes 1000 pounds per square inch to knock out an opponent in a head strike, smash the kidneys, destroy someones throat, and so on.

Please stop posting.

 

[drankin]

I've been involved with martial arts since I was a teenager, some 20+yrs. What I have found is that it doesn't matter the particular system one is proficient in, it matters how proficient one is at it. Whether it's wet-noodle-qwondo or jujitsu, after enough years (10+) of practice you are going to be formidable. A character trait of being in a martial art that long is knowing how not to get in a situation to where you get your butt kicked.

 

[drankin]

And you would be dead, and buried 6 feet under.

Interesting tidbit around this I remember while talking to a much older gentlemen many years ago. When he was a teenager, back in the day, him and his brother had pistols. They were in the country, cowboy types. One would hold an unloaded pistol pointed at the other and they would play "smack the gun before you pulled the trigger". He said that no matter who had the gun the other was able to smack the gun aim away from the other before the trigger was pulled. Crazy, I know, but intersting to note.

 

[leroyjenkens]

I think the most efficient and applicable martial art is boxing. In just about any situation, you'll always be able to punch. Kicking and wrestling are effective, but you may not always have room to throw kicks or the other person might be gigantic and too heavy to wrestle to the ground.

There's other applicable martial arts, but some are just old martial arts based on theory. The problem with traditional martial arts is most of them aren't battle tested. It's based on theory instead of what actually works. A martial art like boxing, however, has had the testing in real fights so that it has evolved into what works and discarded what doesn't. Traditional martial arts usually keep everything, since nothing is proven ineffective through testing. Instead of being based around what works, it's based around what some Japanese guy a thousand years ago THOUGHT worked.

 

[Pattonias]

There's other applicable martial arts, but some are just old martial arts based on theory. The problem with traditional martial arts is most of them aren't battle tested.

I would disagree here. If you do some research you'll learn that nearly all forms of martial arts were battle tested in their time. As absurd as some forms may seem, they all had purpose.

 

[leroyjenkens]

I would disagree here. If you do some research you'll learn that nearly all forms of martial arts were battle tested in their time. As absurd as some forms may seem, they all had purpose.

Battle tested and improved upon? Or battle tested, but nothing was changed?
Any martial art that requires you to grab someone's hand as they punch at you, obviously hasn't been battle tested, since that simply doesn't work.
I actually wonder if a lot of traditional martial arts were even intended for combat. I think a lot of them were just a form of dance or artistic expression and not even meant to fight with.

 

[Saladsamurai]

Battle tested and improved upon? Or battle tested, but nothing was changed?
Any martial art that requires you to grab someone's hand as they punch at you, obviously hasn't been battle tested, since that simply doesn't work.
I actually wonder if a lot of traditional martial arts were even intended for combat. I think a lot of them were just a form of dance or artistic expression and not even meant to fight with.

I can tell you from 1st hand experience that it is not all song and dance when it comes time to fight. It's not like in the movies. Martial artists pay close attention to form and making it look like a 'dance' when practicing; this is a form of self discipline. But, when it comes time to throw down, a lot of that goes out the window and just the overall themes come into play.

 

[Sorry!]

leroy why would you ome on here and say what you said? It looks like the most martial arts knowledge you have comes from jackie chan or steven seagull movies. Yes they do use martial arts, no in a real life fight the probably wouldn't have to even use half the 'technical good looking' type of movements.

You ever watch UFC? They are all trained in some form of martial arts... I'm quite sure they can kick most boxers asses no problem.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I actually wonder if a lot of traditional martial arts were even intended for combat. I think a lot of them were just a form of dance or artistic expression and not even meant to fight with.

Ever watch karate or tae-kwon-do in the olympics? it's actually boring as hell because both fighters are so good they cancel out any cool kicks or moves and have to revert to 100% strategy and speed.

 

[Pattonias]

Ever watch karate or tae-kwon-do in the olympics? it's actually boring as hell because both fighters are so good they cancel out any cool kicks or moves and have to revert to 100% strategy and speed.

If you want to see the really cool stuff watch the featherweight fights.

 

[seycyrus]

Karate and TKD in the olympics are point sparring events. They are boring to watch because of limited target areas, techniques allowed etc.

In the UFC and other such events, boxers would routinely defeat traditional striking arts. This is primarily due to the fact that boxers spend more time in the ring under full contact conditions than do their TMA counterparts.

Boxers would however, be beaten by Judo and/or BJJ guys. Again due to the fact that the ground guys would take the fight to a realm in which *they* had trained in real life conditions.

Once the boxers learned ground techniques, things evened out.

Nowadays, cross training is essential. Traditional MAists Do fairly well. They don't use their traditional techniques however. Noone is taking Neko Ashi Dashi for example. No Shoto Uke...

Standard claims from TMA regarding the watering down/modification/intended use of techniques apply.

 

[leroyjenkens]

You ever watch UFC? They are all trained in some form of martial arts... I'm quite sure they can kick most boxers asses no problem.

Depends on their style. If they're a wrestler, they can take the boxer out of his element and he's useless, but if they're a boxer themselves, they'd be at a disadvantage.
I'm not bashing martial arts, I'm just saying the ones considered "traditional martial arts" aren't very applicable to real fighting. If you want to learn self defense, I say learn boxing. It's the easiest and most applicable of martial arts.

Ever watch karate or tae-kwon-do in the olympics? it's actually boring as hell because both fighters are so good they cancel out any cool kicks or moves and have to revert to 100% strategy and speed.

Everytime the olympics is on, I only see them show rowing or something boring. I never get to see the Tae Kwon Do or Judo. But I love watching that stuff.
I didn't even know Karate was in the olympics.

 

[Pattonias]

If you take anyone out of the element that they trained for they would not perform as well. If you took an MMA into a TKD point sparring match he would not perform as well do to the fact that the tactics are totally different. I know this because I have fought guys with MMA background in point matches and done very well. The guy had devastating kicks, but I was well capable of blocking and countered with speed at light contact. If it was an MMA fight he would have destroyed me. Once we went to the ground, my limited experience in this area would have faired very poorly.

A boxer would have difficulty in a kickboxing competition, but would destroy a kickboxer in a boxing competition. The tactics are what really determine the effectiveness of a fighter.

I would have to say that MMA would be best at street fighting as the fighter is best able to adapt to the different possible scenarios that occur in a fight without rules. MMA in itself is not a style. MMA is exactly as it is described, as a mix of different styles to develop an overall better fighter.

 

[Sorry!]

If you take anyone out of the element that they trained for they would not perform as well. If you took an MMA into a TKD point sparring match he would not perform as well do to the fact that the tactics are totally different. I know this because I have fought guys with MMA background in point matches and done very well. The guy had devastating kicks, but I was well capable of blocking and countered with speed at light contact. If it was an MMA fight he would have destroyed me. Once we went to the ground, my limited experience in this area would have faired very poorly.

A boxer would have difficulty in a kickboxing competition, but would destroy a kickboxer in a boxing competition. The tactics are what really determine the effectiveness of a fighter.

I would have to say that MMA would be best at street fighting as the fighter is best able to adapt to the different possible scenarios that occur in a fight without rules. MMA in itself is not a style. MMA is exactly as it is described, as a mix of different styles to develop an overall better fighter.

This is what I was getting at. Even if you learned some Jiu jitsu but mixed it up with some street fighting styles it would be better than learning boxing. I'm not saying a boxer would lose in a street fight but I think a MMA fighter would be better prepared for what's going to come.

Something even BETTER than MMA though would be Krav Maga. Of course using this style of fighting would be dangerous because it's a 'no-nonsense' type of martial arts. You are fighting to kill or be killed basically.

 

[leroyjenkens]

If you take anyone out of the element that they trained for they would not perform as well. If you took an MMA into a TKD point sparring match he would not perform as well do to the fact that the tactics are totally different. I know this because I have fought guys with MMA background in point matches and done very well. The guy had devastating kicks, but I was well capable of blocking and countered with speed at light contact. If it was an MMA fight he would have destroyed me. Once we went to the ground, my limited experience in this area would have faired very poorly.

A boxer would have difficulty in a kickboxing competition, but would destroy a kickboxer in a boxing competition. The tactics are what really determine the effectiveness of a fighter.

My original point was what would be good for self defense. There's no rules on the street, so a TKD guy who does a bunch of light kicks on the opponent wouldn't be very good.

I would have to say that MMA would be best at street fighting as the fighter is best able to adapt to the different possible scenarios that occur in a fight without rules. MMA in itself is not a style. MMA is exactly as it is described, as a mix of different styles to develop an overall better fighter.

Most scenarios you'll find are going to be people trying to punch you. I don't think I've ever seen a street fight where the guy goes for a takedown or tries a judo throw. If someone is trying to attack you on the street, they're throwing punches 99% of the time. If you're trained in boxing, that person is in trouble.

This is what I was getting at. Even if you learned some Jiu jitsu but mixed it up with some street fighting styles it would be better than learning boxing. I'm not saying a boxer would lose in a street fight but I think a MMA fighter would be better prepared for what's going to come.

Again, what's going to come is most likely going to be punches. If you want to learn self defense, it's highly unlikely you're going to have to defend an armbar on the street.
JuJitsu is very effective, but on the street, if you're taking someone to the ground and trying to armbar them or something, someone else could come up and just kick you right in the head. It's unpredictable on the street, so you should probably stay on your feet.
Not to mention you may not be able to take down the huge guy attacking you. He may weigh 400 pounds, so it's going to be really hard to take him down to try your submissions in the first place.

Something even BETTER than MMA though would be Krav Maga. Of course using this style of fighting would be dangerous because it's a 'no-nonsense' type of martial arts. You are fighting to kill or be killed basically.

People always talk about this. What is it, eye gouges and groin kicks?

 

[Sorry!]

My original point was what would be good for self defense. There's no rules on the street, so a TKD guy who does a bunch of light kicks on the opponent wouldn't be very good.

Most scenarios you'll find are going to be people trying to punch you. I don't think I've ever seen a street fight where the guy goes for a takedown or tries a judo throw. If someone is trying to attack you on the street, they're throwing punches 99% of the time. If you're trained in boxing, that person is in trouble.

Again, what's going to come is most likely going to be punches. If you want to learn self defense, it's highly unlikely you're going to have to defend an armbar on the street.
JuJitsu is very effective, but on the street, if you're taking someone to the ground and trying to armbar them or something, someone else could come up and just kick you right in the head. It's unpredictable on the street, so you should probably stay on your feet.
Not to mention you may not be able to take down the huge guy attacking you. He may weigh 400 pounds, so it's going to be really hard to take him down to try your submissions in the first place.

People always talk about this. What is it, eye gouges and groin kicks?

That's why I said jiu jitsu mixed with a more stand up style. Theres a instructor in New York I think that teaches people this type of fighting and its very effective self-defense. If your a boxer and you punch someone to knock them out you could very well kill them, even if you don't kill them charges could be laid upon you. Thats why in most fights for self-defense it's best to make your opponent get the least amount of hits on you and to stop the fight asap. Which you can do more effectively I think in MMA.
On the streets an MMA fighter has a huge technique advantage and more than likely strength. A boxer more than likely only has a slight technique advantage and lots of strength... That's why when boxers fight MMA fighters in a freestyle fight the boxer normally will lose.

Important aspects of a street fight are ground fighting and joint control IMO. This is for self DEFENSE not for FIGHTING back you seem like one of those 'the best defense is a good offense' people but that's not what this thread from 2007 was about.

 

[leroyjenkens]

If your a boxer and you punch someone to knock them out you could very well kill them, even if you don't kill them charges could be laid upon you. Thats why in most fights for self-defense it's best to make your opponent get the least amount of hits on you and to stop the fight asap. Which you can do more effectively I think in MMA.

It's very unlikely you're going to kill somebody with a punch. If someone is trying to attack you, there's no reason for you to go out of your way to try to stop the fight without hurting your opponent. That's how you end up getting hurt or killed yourself.

On the streets an MMA fighter has a huge technique advantage and more than likely strength. A boxer more than likely only has a slight technique advantage and lots of strength

That's a generalization that doesn't make much sense. Why does a MMA fighter have a huge technique advantage over random strangers on the street, while a boxer only has a slight technique advantage?
And a boxer doesn't necessarily have lots of strength. An MMA fighter would be more likely to be stronger since grappling is so important in his game, while boxers don't grapple at all.

That's why when boxers fight MMA fighters in a freestyle fight the boxer normally will lose.

What's a freestyle fight? Anything goes? MMA fighters would be more likely to win that, depending on their style, because they can just exploit one of the many weaknesses of the boxer.

 

[seycyrus]

If you take anyone out of the element that they trained for they would not perform as well. If you took an MMA into a TKD point sparring match he would not perform as well do to the fact that the tactics are totally different.

The tactics are different because point sparring is MUCH further removed from combat.

contact. If it was an MMA fight he would have destroyed me. Once we went to the ground, my limited experience in this area would have faired very poorly.

Your limited experience on the ground combined with your limited experience in giving and taking full contact blows.

 

[seycyrus]

Important aspects of a street fight are ground fighting and joint control IMO.

Eh, joint control is overrated unless you are talking about the neck, or are perhaps a bouncer and you have to *walk* a guy outside and already have 4 of your fellow bouncers encircling you.

 

[Virtuous]

The fact that you made a statement that simply wasn't true. Are you going to say that someone can't become proficient in a simple type of self defense? You can become proficient in whatever you wish, it does not only have to be something difficult. The person only wanted "some ability to defend myself", he wasn't asking to become a black belt in five easy lessons. Your response was rather arrogant, IMHO.

I am sorry but he's not. There are so many aspects to combat, It's not simple, and it's not easy, It's not something I can really put in words. You have to train your body over and over again. There is no room for mistakes in a self-defense scenario. You have to quick, strong, and highly responsive. Practical knowledge of body mechanics, situation techniques which success depends on how well you preform them. That's not a simple task. It's not like making a mistake in choreography. It's possible that your performance is matter of life and death. You never know what you are up against. You can't equate it to to many activities.

If you want proof, take a self defense class and then defend yourself against a mixed martial artist who has been doing martial arts for only 2 years. Practical experience is lacking. It's something that you have to experience to understand. He's not trying to be rude or arrogant at all.

 

[Freddy_Turnip]

Muay thai

 

[Evo]

I am sorry but he's not. There are so many aspects to combat, It's not simple, and it's not easy, It's not something I can really put in words. You have to train your body over and over again. There is no room for mistakes in a self-defense scenario. You have to quick, strong, and highly responsive. Practical knowledge of body mechanics, situation techniques which success depends on how well you preform them. That's not a simple task. It's not like making a mistake in choreography. It's possible that your performance is matter of life and death. You never know what you are up against. You can't equate it to to many activities.

If you want proof, take a self defense class and then defend yourself against a mixed martial artist who has been doing martial arts for only 2 years. Practical experience is lacking. It's something that you have to experience to understand. He's not trying to be rude or arrogant at all.

This has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I said you can become proficient in something simple. I have no idea what you're rambling on about. And you're referring to a FOUR YEAR OLD POST.

He was advised to take a self defence course from a qualified instructor. He wasn't wanting to become an expert in martial arts.

 

[Sorry!]

If you want proof, take a self defense class and then defend yourself against a mixed martial artist who has been doing martial arts for only 2 years. Practical experience is lacking. It's something that you have to experience to understand. He's not trying to be rude or arrogant at all.

When your shopping at the mall and someone randomly attacks you for whatever reason.

if they know any MMA I would be extremely surprised. If they know any type of martial arts I would still be extremely surprised. Let alone 2 years of full out training.

 

[Virtuous]

Well I agree with you sorry! there, personally I rather not assume. lol I've been attacked with a bat before by a deranged lunatic, and maybe that comes from where I live but still. I was lucky I recover from bat to the back of the leg or I would be sorry. I only got that from sparring with my bothers, who aim a lot to take out my legs. We all have done training and all love combat. I have 4-6 years experience in martial arts. I do weightlifting, and for different reasons I hold being able to defend yourself well is important. Got out of being attack two more time just being my size, and the person being smaller. I still don't feel safe. I can't say I am confident. I was good in martial arts too. Not all situations come out to a fair fight.

Evo:

The person only wanted "some ability to defend myself", he wasn't asking to become a black belt in five easy lessons.

I am saying you probably do need the same level of experience as a black belt to become efficient in self defensive, Even some black belts are not all that great either. I assume when people say they want to defend themselves; not that they mean they want to defend just enough so that they can defend old men from attacking them...or whatever criteria you want. Regardless.

I completely understand, unless you meant something else by that? but then I don't understand your point to call him arrogant.

Even legitimate self defense classes are no walk in the park, you just don't go to few classes and be satisfied. Krav Maga which might actually help someone, that's like 15 levels or so. If you want to defend yourself well, you have to put the effort into it. The guy you were arguing with was actually was trying to be helpful. I am not trying to argue with you I am just trying to point that out. I really don't care, if you don't believe me. As long as someone ponders what I say I am happy to present a different perspective.

 

[Equate]

When your shopping at the mall and someone randomly attacks you for whatever reason.

This notion alone is very wrong.

Where the hell do you live? LA?

 

[Sorry!]

This notion alone is very wrong.

Where the hell do you live? LA?

No in Canada. Yes random attacks do happen.

 

[rootX]

I am sorry but he's not. There are so many aspects to combat, It's not simple, and it's not easy, It's not something I can really put in words. You have to train your body over and over again. There is no room for mistakes in a self-defense scenario. You have to quick, strong, and highly responsive. Practical knowledge of body mechanics, situation techniques which success depends on how well you preform them. That's not a simple task. It's not like making a mistake in choreography. It's possible that your performance is matter of life and death. You never know what you are up against. You can't equate it to to many activities.

If you want proof, take a self defense class and then defend yourself against a mixed martial artist who has been doing martial arts for only 2 years. Practical experience is lacking. It's something that you have to experience to understand. He's not trying to be rude or arrogant at all.

 

[Pattonias]

I don't really understand what point is trying to be made here. MMA is mixed martial arts. Of course someone who is proficient is several styles is going to fair better in a unregulated event such as a mugging. Any self defense preparation gives an advantage in a street fight. Even if you still lose, you should fair better having at least some idea of how to defend yourself over someone who doesn't know anything.

That being said, having training doesn't mean you will automatically win a fight. Chances are the average mugger is going to be decent at fighting himself. Bar fighting could very well be a style. That crazy guy might be very proficient at beating up random people that cross his crazy path. Having training in martial arts could give you the edge you need or could prove useless. The point of self-defense is to help improve your chances. You may be great at it and beat the crap out of some attacker. At the same time, you may only be good enough to get away.

Everyone has their preference for a style. Trying to argue one over the other is about like arguing politics. No one person is going to be convince everyone in here.

 

[Kronos5253]

I'm a black belt in Tae Kwan Do and there is no way i'll be able to defend myself with the techniques I've learned. It is more of a show with memorized routines and nothing really practically. In terms of a workout, it is great, but for real life encounters I would encourage you to pursue some other form of karate. If you ever had a chance to watch Bruce Lee's biography he talks a lot about being flexible in your style and not just master one type of technique since the real world can be unpredictible. You have to constanting be changing style in order to react properly. Bruce created his own form of karate known as Gung Fu in order to address the practical karate. People like Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Chuck Norris were personally taught Gung Fu by Bruce Lee.

If all else fails you can carry around one of those high powered rifles. I'm sure no one will mess try to mess with you

That's incorrect. He created a style called "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeet_Kun_Do" ", which translates to "The way of the intercepting fist". The main influence on it is Wing Chun.

Also, and instructors should tell you this, but very very few do.. The techniques you learn in most martial arts classes like Tae Kwan Do, Karate, Kung Fu, Wing Chun, etc, are strictly for muscle memory. Generally speaking they're not supposed to be used in a real life encounter. They're created so that in a bad situation, it takes little to no thought for your muscles to counter an attack. It's muscle memory. It may not be the form/technique that you're taught, but it will be close enough, or an adaptation of what you've been teaching your brain/muscles to do for years. That's the entire concept behind the forms and techniques that you're taught in class. You're not going to get into a fight and stand in the horse stance and go through your forms, that's ridiculous! But your muscles will react basically involuntarily. There are helpful things like your stance (which is usually 60-40 back leg to front leg), because of balance and power, and the concepts behind the forms, like throwing a punch correctly to get the necessary force out of it. For instance, not just swinging your arm to throw a punch, because your arm doesn't have much weight to it, but instead rotating from the hips and drawing your power from your back foot, through your back, and using the rotation of your hips and the transfer of weight from your back to front foot to maximize the force applied to the target. That's an example of the type of information you should get out of doing forms and listening to your instructor (assuming he's a decent instructor).

I'm a black belt in Tae Kwan Do and there is no way i'll be able to defend myself with the techniques I've learned.

So basically, with that statement, you're right, they won't. But the concepts behind the techniques will help you. Learn what the techniques are teaching you, not just the techniques themselves.

 

[Evo]

That's incorrect. He created a style called "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeet_Kun_Do" ", which translates to "The way of the intercepting fist". The main influence on it is Wing Chun.

Also, and instructors should tell you this, but very very few do.. The techniques you learn in most martial arts classes like Tae Kwan Do, Karate, Kung Fu, Wing Chun, etc, are strictly for muscle memory. Generally speaking they're not supposed to be used in a real life encounter. They're created so that in a bad situation, it takes little to no thought for your muscles to counter an attack. It's muscle memory. It may not be the form/technique that you're taught, but it will be close enough, or an adaptation of what you've been teaching your brain/muscles to do for years. That's the entire concept behind the forms and techniques that you're taught in class. You're not going to get into a fight and stand in the horse stance and go through your forms, that's ridiculous! But your muscles will react basically involuntarily. There are helpful things like your stance (which is usually 60-40 back leg to front leg), because of balance and power, and the concepts behind the forms, like throwing a punch correctly to get the necessary force out of it. For instance, not just swinging your arm to throw a punch, because your arm doesn't have much weight to it, but instead rotating from the hips and drawing your power from your back foot, through your back, and using the rotation of your hips and the transfer of weight from your back to front foot to maximize the force applied to the target. That's an example of the type of information you should get out of doing forms and listening to your instructor (assuming he's a decent instructor).


So basically, with that statement, you're right, they won't. But the concepts behind the techniques will help you. Learn what the techniques are teaching you, not just the techniques themselves.

You're talking to someone that hasn't been here in years.