The Great Debate In Fighting

Fighting is much like debating. Most fighters would disagree with this statement and probably liken fighting to a shouting match.

First Scenario (The Debate):  Opponent #1 attacks Opponent #2 by stating Fact A. Fact A is a good point and shakes Opponent #2’s confidence. Opponent #2 states random Facts to keep Opponent #1 at bay until he realizes the problem with Fact A. In fact, Fact A has a few holes in the theory, although it sounds good, it can easily be countered by Fact D. Once Opponent #2 states Fact D, Opponent #1 cannot come up with a retort because Fact D covers all the bases. Opponent #1 finally yields to Opponent #2’s argument as being superior. Opponent #2 wins the debate.

Second Scenario (The Shouting Match):  Opponent #1 attacks Opponent #2 by stating Fact A. Fact A is a good point and shakes Opponent #2’s confidence. He cannot think of random Facts, nor can he figure out any problems with Fact A’s primary idea. Opponent #2’s answer is to yell and scream an obviously faulty idea at Opponent #1. Opponent #1 yells and screams Fact A louder. Opponents 1 and 2 take turns yelling at each other, louder and louder. Onlookers cannot determine who is winning the argument because the yelling has become the focus of the discussion. Finally, Opponent #1’s voice gives out and he cannot yell any longer. Opponent #2 walks away the victor, not because of a superior argument, but because of his voice being louder and having more mileage.

There are many who believe that being stronger and fighting with more power counters superior technique and strategy. This notion is true, but it has limitations:

  • Some opponents are stronger than you
  • Some opponents cannot easily be hurt
  • Some opponents have superior defensive skills and are difficult to hit
  • Some opponents are faster than you and can hit you three times for every attack you throw
  • Some opponents have superior footwork, so you will not be able to catch them, nor can you evade their attacks

The fighter then, needs to have a better method of landing his attacks as well as have a good set of defensive skills. I find that fighters tend to limit themselves to just knowing basics and combinations, and then they work to get bigger and stronger. The argument is when they catch you, they will hurt you. The counter argument is that you must first catch me—and be able to avoid my bombs. The counter to the counter is you can run, but you can’t hide. The counter to the counter to the counter is “oh yeah? Watch me!”

This can go on for days.

But we save time by developing our landing skills as well as our stopping and evading skills. Have the bigger guns, but make sure you also have better aim and faster reloading ability. If you have an opponent who cannot get away from you and he can’t overpower you AND he does not have superior strategy—he doesn’t have a chance. Learn how to make sure that this combination of scenarios happen, and I guarantee you fighting dominance. One needs more than just bigger arms these days, and you also need to have more than just the same old combination of techniques that everyone else is using. If you want to be a superior fighter, the work is done at the gym as well as the drawing board.

Thanks for visiting my blog.

Author: thekuntawman

full time martial arts teacher, full time martial arts philosopher, and full time martial arts critic

One thought on “The Great Debate In Fighting”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.