Striking

[Tyrone Artur Budzin]

If we are talking about Ringen here, then, does this mean we should put less thought on the striking aspects because it is assumed most are knowledgable on this subject and just concentrate on how to wrestle an adversary to the ground?

I can't help but feel this course of action will leave an enormous gap on the reconstruction of Ringen as a viable martial art. There are numerous instances in the fechtbuchs depicting, through illustrations and writing, different strikes and how to easily parry or dodge them.

Should this art be taken into a direction wherein wrestling/grappling is the only primary response against an attacking opponent?

[Stacy Clifford]

No, we should give striking just as much attention as the masters did because our objective is to reconstruct their art. We're mainly addressing people's expectations in this thread, meaning some modern practitioners were obviously expecting to see more emphasis on striking in the manuals than they are actually finding, and wondering why. We're just trying to propose potential reasons why that might be the case. Regardless of what we think though, if the manual says to hit the guy a certain way, then we should do it that way, and if it says hit him but doesn't say how, then we should feel comfortable that the master trusted us to rely on our own judgment for that.

[Ryan Marcin]

But without the instruction of strikes in (most of) the manuals, how do we reconstruct the methods of striking that they used in training?

Like the culture of brawling that you mentioned, Stacy. The masters could rely on their students to have a basic understanding of throwing a punch or kicking a guy in the groin, but how do we know how they'd do it?

Obviously, throwing a bunch hasn't really changed in a thousand years (or far more than that), but this leaves a gap in the available educational source. Practically, we could just use basic boxing or modern combatives, but it presents a hole with very little textual support.

[Stacy Clifford]

Sure it leaves a gap, but I believe we're overthinking things a bit. Gaps in instruction are largely intentional, so if a master left something like that out, it's probably because he didn't feel that one specific way was better than any other and thus didn't rise to the level of "art" that needed to be written down. Those who felt that there was a more artful way to hit somebody said so. Since you're right that throwing a punch hasn't changed much over human history, then if the master you're studying doesn't outline a more artful way then he is assuming you will default to the status quo and deeming that good enough by omission.

[Ryan Marcin]

Sure it leaves a gap, but I believe we're overthinking things a bit. Gaps in instruction are largely intentional, so if a master left something like that out, it's probably because he didn't feel that one specific way was better than any other and thus didn't rise to the level of "art" that needed to be written down. Those who felt that there was a more artful way to hit somebody said so. Since you're right that throwing a punch hasn't changed much over human history, then if the master you're studying doesn't outline a more artful way then he is assuming you will default to the status quo and deeming that good enough by omission.

Good point.

[nathan featherstone]

something i seem to get from the manuals is that grappling tends to (although not always) be just get the guy on the ground. this makes sense in a battle once he is down you can stab or he may get trampled. in a street fight you can stab or run away.
so as your all saying strikes are a means to an end makes sense as even without armour it can take a good few punches to take somebody down while running the risk of hurting your hand or getting caught. i think its important and a small thing im trying to do is get all the strikes i can see in manuals use them in a pugilism approach and incorporate them into the system as a whole. strikes are still important and to have what we all would like which is a "complete" system it might just require a lot of checking manuals and working it out. thoughts?

[C.Scott Relleve]

I'd definitely see armed combat preferring to emphasize grappling, as striking someone with your fist while they have a weapon on hand is generally considered a terrible idea (unless said striking leads up to wrestling the opponent in order to control the opponent and potentially seize the weapon).

I do believe that striking still has its place, and I believe that Ancient Greece's boxing covers the use of hands as weapons (they are wrapped in such a way that a punch would do nearly as serious a damage as getting clubbed and create gaping cuts due to the roughness of the material used to wrap the hands, if I recall correctly), and pankration covers having both grappling and striking hand in hand, combining wrestling and striking as one (hence its parallels to modern mixed martial arts) as a contest of strength and athleticism, as well as civilian fisticuffs or in unarmed fights for honor between two individuals during that era.

Given Ancient Greek's pugilism and pankration being similar to modern mixed martial arts fights (without some illegal moves, like breaking fingers, groin grabs/strikes, etc.), simply practicing modern boxing, kickboxing (it seems kicks were also prevalent in ancient pankration matches) and wrestling (or modern hand to hand combatives) would probably do as well, seeing as they didn't really change that much throughout time anyway.

[william_cain_iii]

I'm curious, how would ARMA classify Krav Maga? Is it a western martial art, or an eastern one? Is it considered one at all?

I had thought it would be considered a western art, with its origins lying in WWII europe, but I have yet to see it discussed here.

Or am I just missing something obvious as a new guy to all this?

Appreciation in advance!

[Gene Tausk]

I'm curious, how would ARMA classify Krav Maga? Is it a western martial art, or an eastern one? Is it considered one at all?

I had thought it would be considered a western art, with its origins lying in WWII europe, but I have yet to see it discussed here.

Or am I just missing something obvious as a new guy to all this?

Appreciation in advance!

It's a Western martial art, but it is out of our area of concern so it really does not apply to us. Not that it is not effective, but not what we are here for.

[william_cain_iii]

Ah, understood, thank you for the information.

[Will Phillips]

From kickboxing I can say that unless there is an early KO the man with the better hands typically wins. Kicks are an additional tool but in a self defense situation it is best to not kick much above waiste level. As mentioned earlier Thai leg kicks are wonderful but there is also several other low line kicks that are unusable in sports martial arts due to the injuries they are designed to inflict. I'll see if I can find an article on them if there is any intrest in the subject.

[Tyrone Artur Budzin]

Much of the strikes we see in sports such as kick boxing, UFC, Muai thai..etc.. are legal due to the fact they would not cause grave damage to the body. In Ringen we have strikes to the groin, neck and knee caps which could potentially cause permanent injury or even kill an opponent. Just my additional 2 cents on the subject.