Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I don't think anyone as claimed that the combination of judo, boxing, and thumb wrestling will make them invincible.
Just a discussion about stereotypes and paradigms and how you have to be careful to not generalize or from assumptions based on a particular training methodology.
What made you make the conclusion that someone inferred invincibility? I don't see it.
Granted, the thread does not necessariliy follow what the OP posted.
|
Venting my frustration partially, but I am trying to stop the conversation from going that way. Every time someone mentions UFC, MMA, or BJJ on this forum it inevitably turns into the same discussion. I am not downing any style or martial art here, but I am tired of 12 year-olds bragging about how they could beat up anyone because they do aikido every other weekend at the YMCA and have a yellow belt from karate america. I said no one was invincible because both could win, especially in a fight with no rules. It seems to be logically flawed to continue in such a ludicrous question. I don't think any serious discussion about Aikido can be made concerning whether it can be used to beat up X's art. Not that the idea of Aikido being practical is outlandish, but because who wins a fight has more to do with when, where, how, who, why, and what they are fighting... which are largely undefined. To me this question is as ridiculous as asking someone what is the best way to shoot your foot? There are already two sides on this debate, though...