"If one cannot face a single unarmed opponent when attack is known, when weapon wielding, multiple opponents when surprised is impossible."
This is the worst argument I've read so far. If you waisted youre time reading the article, youl see he believe that in order to defend yourself you need to face an opponent in a sport. How in the HELL is that supposed to teach us to face knife weilding multiple opponents??????
I dont understand how a world grpapling champ has ANY place teaching the American military how to fight on the battlefield. WTF???
The article didn't say you shouldn't practice knife defense and multiple opponent defense. It was just about how some sport qualitites carry on to combat. But you did not seem to understand that. Probaly because you are very intent on bashing Sonnon that you will read everything and say something negatively about it. Or transform it into something else. He did not say combat arts are useless and that you should only use sports to prepare for combat he said "Both these positions are wrong because they are distinguished against one another, rahter than integrated with one another, both camps can and should be integrated." He also says "The argument that sport fighting techniques are more effective combat techniques because they are tested in sport is like saying high-performance NASCAR machines are more effective in demolition derbies because they are tested in races. You may know what it’s like to maneuver with the engine screaming, but only within the confines of specific rules. And more importantly, although you may have witnessed a collision few times in your career, they were “accidents” whereas in a demolition… they’re the goal.
Comment