“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”

 

Posted by ADAM CARTER on OCT 26, 2022

"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth" - Mike Tyson

 

Is it accurate to say that no martial art is necessarily better than another?

To provide an answer, you need to first complete the question. Define “better”. A martial art is better at what? Cardio? Sparring? Ground-work? Winning trophies? Self-defense? Street combat? etc. etc.

I think it is safe to say yes, that there are some martial arts better suited to achieving specific goals.

In the end it depends what you want out of it. The main issue is that the term “better” implies some sort of measure of fighting ability. The only systems that are really any good at delivering on that, for the average person, are those that test it realistically and under pressure.

I constantly receive messages and comments from young people who state their martial art is best, and I would get humbled on the mat. Fighting is not a theoretical exercise, in safe, mats on the floor environment.

Unfortunately, the VAST MAJORITY of martial arts out there would fall into the category of “non-functional martial arts”. They emphasize practicing predictable two person drills against cooperative training partners. And even when partners resist, there are always rules to follow, and the inevitable “tap out”. As such, their delivery systems may be lacking, and would get you beaten up or worse in a real fight against an opponent, or opponents, that don’t stick to the rules, and are intent on harming you with hidden weapons.

“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.” – Mike Tyson

The people of Okinawa formulated karate in order to protect themselves from assault in a civilian environment, not in any kind of sporting context. This needs to be understood. If we examine the older karate texts – e.g. The Bubishi – we can see references to the various aspects of “koryu” (old school) karate.

There can be little doubt that karate does not have the same status it did in the past. To the wider martial arts community, traditional karate is often viewed as an out-dated relic and a wholly ineffective system.

Karate is often criticized for its lack of realism, its lack of close-range techniques, its omission of ground work, the unrealistic nature of its sparring, the impracticality of its techniques etc. And I have to admit, that in many cases these criticisms are justified! However, it is not ‘traditional karate’ that is at fault, but the way its taught.

Grappling skills, which are missing from some modern karate dojo, are a must in real combat and they formed a large part of old-style karate. Practice would have included those close-range techniques of grappling (Tegumi), Joint Locks (Kansetsu-waza), Chokes & Strangles (Shime-waza), Throws & Takedowns (Nage-waza) and Ground Fighting (Ne-Waza). All of which are now totally missing from most modern practice.

Those that say they “did karate” for a few years and changed to Jiu Jitsu, or something similar, because it didn’t work are missing the point. – Not all schools, gyms and dojo are equal. They obviously didn’t find the right dojo.

As an example. The methodology of boxing is perfect for winning boxing bouts. The methodology of MMA is perfect for winning MMA bouts. The methodology of points karate is perfect for winning points karate bouts. The methodology of Jiu-Jitsu is perfect for winning Jiu-Jitsu bouts. And so on. I think people who participate in combat sports often fall into the trap of defending it as 100% transferable to real self-defense, and not for what it is, a sport with a set of rules.

But NONE of the above is the BEST, or perfect for self-protection. As with everything else, only self-protection skills are prefect for self-protection. Of course, there are transferable skills and attributes, and beneficial qualities resulting from competing in combat sports, but the differences are of vital importance and should never be overlooked.

Other than for fun, sport or dojo sparring, people don’t square off in a self-defense scenario. Why? Because it’s dumb. If you had to take out the biggest, scariest, armed with a weapon thug, you can imagine, how would you do it? By taking him to the ground for a submission? Going toe-to-toe fighting?….. No. From behind with a weapon. And maybe with some friends…… Are you ready for that?

With thanks to Iain Abernethy

 Photo Credit: Image by master1305 on Freepik