stick to basics

[tkd_wrestler]

any martial art can be used to take your opponent down with a single blow but it's not the martial art but the martial artists that makes the attack effective. i've studied tae kwon do for eight years now and i can tell you how to effectively use almost any of the techniques to take your opponent down.

also, there are some attacks that aren't good for knocking your opponent out (unless you have a lot of power) but can be used strategically in the fight. for example, a back fist to set up for a strike to the soulerplex and a knee in the face.

i don't use straight punches because they stick but don't usual knock you out. a good knock out punch would come from boxing.

[Little Apple]

doesn't the "best move" depend on the situation, what you're good at, what your opponant is bad at, and where you are in relation to each other? It seems like a bad plan to hear from someone that "A" is the best, and then go into a fight (in the ring or otherwise) planning to use only that instead of playing to your strengths and looking for openings.

[Little Apple]

That's odd...Not that I disagree with myself, but I really don't remember writing the above post...

{Edit: Oh, that's because this was a year ago. odd that it popped up as new. Someone must have voted}

[aseepish]

I've got that same strange feeling. It seems I last posted on this thread nearly five years ago.

[bodhisattva]

I was thinking after seeing a trailer for the matrix 2 and 3 that: wouldn't it be good if you could train yourself so that you could dodge/block any attack the finish your opponent off with a super speed spinning jump-kick. how wrong i was, this philosophy leads to points contests and moves that look good but would never work in real life. eg because i think that my style is so good that one hit will KO any opponent i say "if i hit you just once then i win, if you hit me then i would be knocked out so you win." this is fighting for points and encourages people to spend all of their training time on defence since attack power doesn't really matter, also moves will be selected for speed, unpredictableness and whether or not they look good (a judge is bound to score more highly for moves which look good). you end up with kung fu/karate/aikido/tae kwon do, it looks good and may be good excersise and no one gets hurt practising it but its basicly useless as a form of self defence. Here is a tried and tested move that works in a real fight: straight punch to the face.

Yeah. Stick to basics, or better said: stick to the fundamentals. If you stick to the fundamentals, the "complex" moves will arise on their own - if they have any usage.

[bodhisattva]

any martial art can be used to take your opponent down with a single blow but it's not the martial art but the martial artists that makes the attack effective. i've studied tae kwon do for eight years now and i can tell you how to effectively use almost any of the techniques to take your opponent down.

also, there are some attacks that aren't good for knocking your opponent out (unless you have a lot of power) but can be used strategically in the fight. for example, a back fist to set up for a strike to the soulerplex and a knee in the face.

i don't use straight punches because they stick but don't usual knock you out. a good knock out punch would come from boxing.

Yes, if you want to know how to strike accurately with power against a larger resisting opponent, well, Boxing is definitely one of the best avenues you could take.

[Marksmarkou]

I think the best strikes would be a good solid jab, a hard reverse punch/cross.