Ciaran Daly wrote:Jeremiah: as I said earlier I'm not new to martial arts, I've used escrima moves in muay thai bouts - I already know a lot of this stuff translates. And yeah I've trained with SWAT guys, military & law enforcement folks too: hang around long enough in martial arts and it's hard not to.
I'm not going to turn to the MPD entry team guy next to me in knife class and call him a "recreational martial artist" - his bad day at work might be his his last day at work, my bad day at work gets solved after a stiff drink. But for most of us, regardless of the level we are at, that's what we are.
I read that you were not new to martial arts, just new to ARMA. I did not mean to imply that you were (as we say in Alaska) Cheechako (new guy, greenhorn, uninformed). After your last post I do understand what you were meaning my "recreational martial arts." To re-assert my point, which you did not address, that term should be applied to all martial arts (and artists) who do not make their living using the art. You are correct, most of us will not use this in real life, some do. Therefore, most of us would qualify for (what you call) "recreational martial artists." But so would anyone who learned Jiujitsu, Judo, Akido, Karate, Escrima, etc. Because most of them will never use those skills in everyday life (your stif drink story applies to most of them as well).
In fact, in one of the manuals, we are told that this martial art is good for exercise and remaining in shape (I can't remember which one, I am terrible at that, My group leader would know). That would make some of the ancients who practiced this "recreational" according to your classification.
I see what you are saying, but I still disagree. Just because we use this art a certain way, with a limited applicability does not remove the martialis from it. It is still a deadly fighting art, whether we use it in life or not it is still a serious and dangerous thing.
Unless we called this "re-creational" because we do have to re-create the system from the manuals
