How effective is martial art in battles?

Most of martial arts where designed for individual use. Samurai often were experts at them. Unfortunately for them, Samurai perceived war as a series of individual skirmishes. One had to look opponent straight in the eyes before killing him. This was interfering with efficient war strategy when military leaders in Japan realized that a unit of peasants armed with muskets was more effective. This is the reason Samurai were disbanded and replaced with more modern army. In the WWII Japanese pilots considered themselves historical descendants of Samurai. They had often superior skills to their American counterparts, bit were ineffective against superior team work of US pilots.

First you have to define what a Martial Art is.  A lot of posters seem to be under the impression that 'martial arts' refer only to unarmed combat.  IMO, a martial art is:

1)  Something that trains a person to fight systematically, not just with mere animal instinct.

2)  Something that trains the mind as well as the body.

So every trained army in history learned 'martial arts' of some kind.  Any soldier who trained for combat - whether the Greeks, the Romans, or the Mongols, all had to learn a 'martial art' just to use their weapon.  Martial Arts does not just refer to Kung Fu/Karate, etc.



Edited by Gorkhali

Can't see how can it help you if the guy you face was training with a sword, and not to mention he had armor.

So saying all that, your cakes and punches won�t do any good against a guy wearing any type of armor.

 and  this guys VS.  this guys  and

 

 

And forgot to put about the rebellion in China against the Germans, Russians, British, and the Japanese, they all had guns, but the rebellion didn�t, because they trusted martial arts to defeat them and numbers, and of course you know what happened.

 

And by the way in man has been training for unarmed combat versus a man has been trained with swords going to be obvious (both with no armor).

 

 

guys with guns and armor and a dagger VS.  guys with only martial art                  or

Edited by Praetorian

I never understood the connection between martial arts (like shaolin kungfu) and combat. Sports like fencing, and i think this goes for most regular combat training as well, are focussed on reflex and interaction between you and your opponent. At martial arts events, you always see these choriographed, planned monologues. There is no interaction. There is no competition, no feints, no counter attacks, no strategy... Just a prepared series of movements. In a real situation, even when equipped with proper armor and weaponry, how can this be useful at all?

Originally posted by Imperator Invictus I think the guy with no armor will reach the electromagnet first. I think martial arts (as in dancing around with fancing moves) in shoulder to shoulder sword/shield melee is not effective. In this case, strength and accuracy is most important. It is effective, however, in skirmish fighting like in buildings and forests.

 

The Romans fought shoulder to shoulder with shield and swords and it was extremely effective.

 

It all depends the equipment you using in fighting, because the Roman short swords will be perfect fighting in a tight or closed area (I read about this and I have one, I can wield my Roman sword in my closet).

I made you can pretty much block a hallway with the Roman shield, and the guy jump or runs at you, well you can throw javelins at his @$$.

And as for the night or a samurai well I don�t think taking and punching will hurt the guy.

And almost forgot to mention Pike men or phalanx fought shoulder to shoulder.

Edited by Praetorian

you people haven't been paying much attention to all this people like Gorkhali and belisarus have you?

Originally posted by Imperator Invictus Some modern practioners you see may focuse on "arts" instead of the "martial" aspect. But you shouldn't get that confused with the original intention. Martial arts were originally made for combat and were effective. Their practitioners had real reflexes like how they are choreographed nowadays in more realistic martial arts movies.

Ok, I guess you're right... but then it is kind of sad however that all those people that are really serious about things like kung fu (even the name kung fu emphasizes achievment and learning) are actually training the wrong things. Even the Shaolin monks, who should be the closest to the original tradition I think, merely dance with their weapons instead of fighting with it... it doesn't seem to have any combat value at all

[QUOTE=El_Bandito]Martial arts in war is not really effective.  Mongols took China without the use of firearms.  Did any Jet Li/Bruce Lee saved China?  NO.  Any crouching tigers?  No.  What about hidden dragons?  Also no."

And Mongol hordes did not save Mongolia from Communist invasion from Soviet and Chinese economy in the South. In fact, there are more Mongolias in Inner Mongolia than in Mongolia.

And, by the way, I was in Athens for the 2004 Olympic game, as far as I know, I didnt see any Mongolian win any gold medal in wrestling, but I did see a Korean won a Gold in Roman-Greco wresting in mid weight category.

So based on your assumption on Chinese inferiority to Mongols on battlefield, I can also claim that Mongolians today are far inferior to Chinese in every category of state strength; technology, Olympic performace, economy, foreign affair, etc.

"NO.  Any crouching tigers?  No.  What about hidden dragons?  Also no.", you said.

But I dont see any modern admiration of Mongolian culture and arts let alone popularity of Mongol ideology. As a undergraduated student in Political Science in University of Toronto, I study philosophical texts of Plato, Aristo, Rousseau,  Marx, and I also study classical texts of Confucious, Mohist, and several Oriental way of foreign affairs. Among all these influential thinkers and civilizations.

But how Mongol shaped our modern world today and tomorrow?

What Gorkhali said. Hollywood has created this misconception that all marial arts are limited to East Asians in funky pyjamas jumping in the air and kicking stuff, but that is merely the tip of the martial arts iceberg. Though quite a few matial arts would be relativly useless for armed combat in pitched battle.

I've got to agree with Cwyr in this one.  I have done tae kwon do for about an year, and most of the things you do are not what you see on Olympic games (one second flash kick and stuff)- mostly, you learn to tranquilize yourself, gather your ki, and other psycological "mind training" rather than actual physical moves.

Martial arts are actually made to "train" warriors.  Not just for their health, but also for their moral and psycology. 

Ok "kids", I really dunnot know how to start about your post directed at me.  I did say the Mongol wrestling techniques were more effective than martial arts in battle.  WTF are you talking about some Greco Roman sh*t?  Who cares about some sport competition when this thread is about fighting in BATTLE!  If you friggin care about some wrestling competition, I ask you this.  HOW MANY SUMO GRAND CHAMPIONS DOES CHINA HAVE, be it international one or just Japanese competition.  None.  Care to know the biggest Yokozuna in Japan right now?  A Mongolian.

Also why in the world are you talking about Russians conquering Mongolia and China conquering Mongola?  What are they got to do with what I was saying?  Are you illiterate or just bad at getting the meaning of others words?   And WTF is this about you are BASING your beliefs from MY WORDS, that the Mongolian state is weaker than PRC currently.  That is a fact, you don't have to base it on my assumption.

I was only refering to the Mongol conquest of China using arrows and swords because the Chinese simply romance that their heroes can dodge arrows and murder 100 men instantly with a swipe of their blade, punch through walls and many other blah blah.  The Crouching Tiger and Hidden Dragon was meant to be a comical reference.  Guns and economy do not involve here.  Plus I wasn't talking about any arts or culture.  Don't bring any sh*t about how Mongolians will shape today, or tomorrow etc. 

Sorry for the bad temper, for I have little tolerance toward ignorance.  I do congratulate you for graduating college though.


Edited by El_Bandito