Martial Arts Experiences Discussion Thread

[Naperville]

How Important is the Size of Your Knife?



Jim

Thanks for the link to this guys videos. I like his presentation and everything he says. I'm educated, not an expert but everything rings true to me.

The only reason why I prefer a larger knife is to keep people off of me. Every inch means there is an extra inch between myself and an attacker. If I have the opportunity to stand them off facing me, they will probably not close the gap. There are reasonable blade lengths though, say a 1 to 7 inch blade. A 100 inch blade length would not be wise as the longer a weapon gets the easier it is to defend against at combatives distances.

I would say that a 1/2 inch or even 1 inch blade is enough for a skilled attacker. Few can afford to hire the equivalent of the secret service to protect them and scanning an area for all possible avenues of attack are hard when the weapon is small and concealable. I don't like it at all when popular people go up to a crowd and shake hands.

It's terrible. Evil, deranged people are all around us.

Like you say, never underestimate anyone.

[James Y]

How Important is the Size of Your Knife?



Jim

Thanks for the link to this guys videos. I like his presentation and everything he says. I'm educated, not an expert but everything rings true to me.

The only reason why I prefer a larger knife is to keep people off of me. Every inch means there is an extra inch between myself and an attacker. If I have the opportunity to stand them off facing me, they will probably not close the gap. There are reasonable blade lengths though, say a 1 to 7 inch blade. A 100 inch blade length would not be wise as the longer a weapon gets the easier it is to defend against at combatives distances.

I would say that a 1/2 inch or even 1 inch blade is enough for a skilled attacker. Few can afford to hire the equivalent of the secret service to protect them and scanning an area for all possible avenues of attack are hard when the weapon is small and concealable. I don't like it at all when popular people go up to a crowd and shake hands.

It's terrible. Evil, deranged people are all around us.

Like you say, never underestimate anyone.

Thanks for sharing.

I read somewhere that Billy the Kid killed his first man with a half-inch-long broken pocket knife blade.

Jim

[James Y]

Use of a Knife / 3 Ways to Slash



Jim

[James Y]

Attack on Ohio Trooper Sparks Cruiser Theft and Rollover Pursuit Crash



The guy is insane, on something, or (and I'm being serious) under spiritual possession. Or a combination of any of those things.

I'm posting this here because neither the taser nor the trooper's punches had any effect on the guy. Even though the trooper seemed to have been easily handling the physical fight, at least until his bodycam fell on the ground. Nutjob still got away in the cruiser and posed a huge danger to the public. And the entire time, he never shut the *bleep* up.

I won't Monday morning quarterback and say what the trooper "should have done." I will say that there seems to be enough evidence that tasers are only effective some of the time. Many times they are completely ineffective. And oftentimes, trading punches with someone has a very low chance of hurting them, much less stopping them, especially if they are insane and aggressively charging like that. If they are on certain substances, or under demonic possession, tasers and punches will most likely do nothing at all. Maybe the trooper would have been better off to have had his pistol out and ready to shoot, instead of the taser. But again, I'm not him, and I'm not in his situation.

Jim

[Naperville]

Attack on Ohio Trooper Sparks Cruiser Theft and Rollover Pursuit Crash



The guy is insane, on something, or (and I'm being serious) under spiritual possession. Or a combination of any of those things.

I'm posting this here because neither the taser nor the trooper's punches had any effect on the guy. Even though the trooper seemed to have been easily handling the physical fight, at least until his bodycam fell on the ground. Nutjob still got away in the cruiser and posed a huge danger to the public. And the entire time, he never shut the *bleep* up.

I won't Monday morning quarterback and say what the trooper "should have done." I will say that there seems to be enough evidence that tasers are only effective some of the time. Many times they are completely ineffective. And oftentimes, trading punches with someone has a very low chance of hurting them, much less stopping them, especially if they are insane and aggressively charging like that. If they are on certain substances, or under demonic possession, tasers and punches will most likely do nothing at all. Maybe the trooper would have been better off to have had his pistol out and ready to shoot, instead of the taser. But again, I'm not him, and I'm not in his situation.

Jim

I am the last guy to give the state more tools for hurting citizens, and I do NOT in any way think the state should be hurting anyone. It can be terrifying for some to deal with the police, state troopers, the FBI, etc., and these are logical fears. There have been abuses.

What I am in support of are returning metal flashlights and batons to police use. Most agencies took those away and this leaves police to use their bare hands against the psychotic, the drugged, and just plain vicious people.

Everyone who works for the state in a policing capacity signs up to enforce the law in it's full continuum and taking away blunt instruments leaves state officers with only firearms as a last resort. This is a mistake.

[Naperville]

Summary and Counter Argument of a Video that I saw yesterday

Some guy with a popular YouTube channel said in a video posted 2+ years ago that everything boils down to 3 fighting styles: Kickboxing, Grappling, and Wrestling.

Not so fast. I think grappling and wrestling could just be summarized as GRAPPLING. Kickboxing is primarily STRIKING.

Many fights in the street involve weapons. I've heard that greater than 50% of the fights on the street involve weapons, but I think that is a lie. If just 10% to 25% involve weapons, I think they are important enough to say WEAPONS are the 3RD "style."

Lets not make it more complex than what it is for newbs to be able to train. I say there are 3 major areas of study. Those involving :

- Striking or Pushing (Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Boxing, Muay Thai, Karate, Kung Fu, kick, knee, punch, elbow, head butt, slap, ...)

- Grappling and Throwing (Judo, Wrestling, BJJ, Jujitsu, HapKiDo, chokes, throws, pins, locks, ...)

- Weapons (firearms(handgun, shotgun, rifle, ...), weapons using projectiles(rocks, throwing knives, spears, javelins, bow and arrow, atlatl, ...), flexible weapons(whip, rope, garrot, ...), edged and pointy weapons(sai, knife, sword, sickle, machete, ...), blunt instruments(sap, Bo, bat, staff, pipe, brass knuckles, ...), ...)

[Scandi Grind]

My brother suggested that to simplify farther, there really are only two types of fighting: winning and losing.

Joking aside, my thoughts are along the same lines and these are the same three major catagories that I tend to break fighting down into.

[James Y]

Summary and Counter Argument of a Video that I saw yesterday

Some guy with a popular YouTube channel said in a video posted 2+ years ago that everything boils down to 3 fighting styles: Kickboxing, Grappling, and Wrestling.

Not so fast. I think grappling and wrestling could just be summarized as GRAPPLING. Kickboxing is primarily STRIKING.

Many fights in the street involve weapons. I've heard that greater than 50% of the fights on the street involve weapons, but I think that is a lie. If just 10% to 25% involve weapons, I think they are important enough to say WEAPONS are the 3RD "style."

Lets not make it more complex than what it is for newbs to be able to train. I say there are 3 major areas of study. Those involving :

- Striking or Pushing (Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Boxing, Muay Thai, Karate, Kung Fu, kick, knee, punch, elbow, head butt, slap, ...)

- Grappling and Throwing (Judo, Wrestling, BJJ, Jujitsu, HapKiDo, chokes, throws, pins, locks, ...)

- Weapons (firearms(handgun, shotgun, rifle, ...), weapons using projectiles(rocks, throwing knives, spears, javelins, bow and arrow, atlatl, ...), flexible weapons(whip, rope, garrot, ...), edged and pointy weapons(sai, knife, sword, sickle, machete, ...), blunt instruments(sap, Bo, bat, staff, pipe, brass knuckles, ...), ...)

I wonder if by 'grappling' and 'wrestling' if he meant standing grappling like clinching (such as the Thai clinch), as being separate from wrestling takedowns and ground work?

I'm generally wary of martial arts channels that speak in absolutes. Meaning, "Only this works, the rest doesn't work." And of course, what works is what he/she does, and what doesn't work is what other people do that he/she has no experience in.

Jim

[Naperville]

Summary and Counter Argument of a Video that I saw yesterday

Some guy with a popular YouTube channel said in a video posted 2+ years ago that everything boils down to 3 fighting styles: Kickboxing, Grappling, and Wrestling.

Not so fast. I think grappling and wrestling could just be summarized as GRAPPLING. Kickboxing is primarily STRIKING.

Many fights in the street involve weapons. I've heard that greater than 50% of the fights on the street involve weapons, but I think that is a lie. If just 10% to 25% involve weapons, I think they are important enough to say WEAPONS are the 3RD "style."

Lets not make it more complex than what it is for newbs to be able to train. I say there are 3 major areas of study. Those involving :

- Striking or Pushing (Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Boxing, Muay Thai, Karate, Kung Fu, kick, knee, punch, elbow, head butt, slap, ...)

- Grappling and Throwing (Judo, Wrestling, BJJ, Jujitsu, HapKiDo, chokes, throws, pins, locks, ...)

- Weapons (firearms(handgun, shotgun, rifle, ...), weapons using projectiles(rocks, throwing knives, spears, javelins, bow and arrow, atlatl, ...), flexible weapons(whip, rope, garrot, ...), edged and pointy weapons(sai, knife, sword, sickle, machete, ...), blunt instruments(sap, Bo, bat, staff, pipe, brass knuckles, ...), ...)

I wonder if by 'grappling' and 'wrestling' if he meant standing grappling like clinching (such as the Thai clinch), as being separate from wrestling takedowns and ground work?

I'm generally wary of martial arts channels that speak in absolutes. Meaning, "Only this works, the rest doesn't work." And of course, what works is what he/she does, and what doesn't work is what other people do that he/she has no experience in.

Jim

It has been a couple of days since I watched the video but I think he listed the attributes to defend his selection process.

I have not been involved in grappling or wrestling. I did take Judo and that is close to BJJ, but also has throws.

I think I simplified entire categories.


Video below:

[James Y]

Summary and Counter Argument of a Video that I saw yesterday

Some guy with a popular YouTube channel said in a video posted 2+ years ago that everything boils down to 3 fighting styles: Kickboxing, Grappling, and Wrestling.

Not so fast. I think grappling and wrestling could just be summarized as GRAPPLING. Kickboxing is primarily STRIKING.

Many fights in the street involve weapons. I've heard that greater than 50% of the fights on the street involve weapons, but I think that is a lie. If just 10% to 25% involve weapons, I think they are important enough to say WEAPONS are the 3RD "style."

Lets not make it more complex than what it is for newbs to be able to train. I say there are 3 major areas of study. Those involving :

- Striking or Pushing (Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Boxing, Muay Thai, Karate, Kung Fu, kick, knee, punch, elbow, head butt, slap, ...)

- Grappling and Throwing (Judo, Wrestling, BJJ, Jujitsu, HapKiDo, chokes, throws, pins, locks, ...)

- Weapons (firearms(handgun, shotgun, rifle, ...), weapons using projectiles(rocks, throwing knives, spears, javelins, bow and arrow, atlatl, ...), flexible weapons(whip, rope, garrot, ...), edged and pointy weapons(sai, knife, sword, sickle, machete, ...), blunt instruments(sap, Bo, bat, staff, pipe, brass knuckles, ...), ...)

I wonder if by 'grappling' and 'wrestling' if he meant standing grappling like clinching (such as the Thai clinch), as being separate from wrestling takedowns and ground work?

I'm generally wary of martial arts channels that speak in absolutes. Meaning, "Only this works, the rest doesn't work." And of course, what works is what he/she does, and what doesn't work is what other people do that he/she has no experience in.

Jim

It has been a couple of days since I watched the video but I think he listed the attributes to defend his selection process.

I have not been involved in grappling or wrestling. I did take Judo and that is close to BJJ, but also has throws.

I think I simplified entire categories.


Video below:

I trained Judo (my first martial art) and also trained awhile in BJJ (the last art I took up). I much preferred Judo. And the Judo I learned back in the '70s was an older style of Judo, that included plenty of floor grappling / submissions that are also found in BJJ, as well as some limited Atemi-waza (simple striking techniques intended strictly for self-defense). I felt that Judo was better all-around, and with the throws and sweeps, Judo had a much better transition from standing to ground grappling.

However, IMO, Judo (as well as BJJ, wrestling, etc.) are very hard on the body, and I believe (and have seen) that very few people can continue practicing those arts as the body ages, compared to many other types of martial arts.

The problem with a lot of these martial arts YouTube channels is that most of them are posted by Millennials or Gen Z-ers, who think that self-defense is the same as a sporting contest. And that they will always be able to train or fight a certain way, and that they'll never get old. I thought that way too when I was young, but I didn't have a YouTube channel way back then.

Jim

[James Y]

Don't Make This Fatal Mistake in Self-Defense Situations



Jim

[James Y]

Chuck Norris Slams Steven Seagal

This interview looks to be from sometime in the 1990s. It's highly unusual to see Chuck Norris talking like this about anybody. In fact, this is a first for me. Which says a lot about Seagal's real-life attitude.



Jim

[James Y]

"THIS is Why You Must Watch Your Back at All Times"



If you train for self-defense, THESE are some examples of the types of people and situations that you are training for. This isn't even taking into account multiple attackers. There are HUGE differences between sparring in a martial arts school, and sport fighting in a ring or a cage (as well as ego-based street fights), and real-life self-defense against predatory sociopaths, who sneak attack, often with weapons, without warning or hesitation.

This doesn't necessarily mean to live in a constant state of paranoia. It means to be aware when you are out and about, the same way you are aware of pedestrians, other cars, and road conditions while driving.

Many combat sports practitioners claim that what they do can handle any situation, under any circumstances; and if they want to, they can fight dirty, too. Yes, they could; but will they? You will act and react the way you train. Unless you already came from a background with a lot of real-life, non-sport violence; if you do not have the mindset to fight "dirty," and if you do not specifically train seriously with the intent to do so under sudden, immediate pressure, then when the SHTF, you will react (if you are able to react at all) with whatever has been ingrained into you, which is the way you've trained.

And this is only if you see the attack coming. Most people have very low levels of awareness when out and about.

Jim

[Naperville]

"THIS is Why You Must Watch Your Back at All Times"



If you train for self-defense, THESE are some examples of the types of people and situations that you are training for. This isn't even taking into account multiple attackers. There are HUGE differences between sparring in a martial arts school, and sport fighting in a ring or a cage (as well as ego-based street fights), and real-life self-defense against predatory sociopaths, who sneak attack, often with weapons, without warning or hesitation.

This doesn't necessarily mean to live in a constant state of paranoia. It means to be aware when you are out and about, the same way you are aware of pedestrians, other cars, and road conditions while driving.

Many combat sports practitioners claim that what they do can handle any situation, under any circumstances; and if they want to, they can fight dirty, too. Yes, they could; but will they? You will act and react the way you train. Unless you already came from a background with a lot of real-life, non-sport violence; if you do not have the mindset to fight "dirty," and if you do not specifically train seriously with the intent to do so under sudden, immediate pressure, then when the SHTF, you will react (if you are able to react at all) with whatever has been ingrained into you, which is the way you've trained.

And this is only if you see the attack coming. Most people have very low levels of awareness when out and about.

Jim

You can eliminate 80% of the problems, but that 20% is what keeps bodyguards up at night.

Depending on the glasses and hat that you wear there may be a few solutions, though they are not perfect:
https://www.google.com/search?q=bicycli ... es+mirrors

When I was younger, I lived near some very bad teens with rap sheets 10ft long. You had to be ready to be attacked 24x7. If you let your guard down you would get attacked. Most of them ended up dead or in prison within 5 years of high school graduation. "Unprovoked Attack" was probably their middle name.

[Naperville]

Chuck Norris Slams Steven Seagal

This interview looks to be from sometime in the 1990s. It's highly unusual to see Chuck Norris talking like this about anybody. In fact, this is a first for me. Which says a lot about Seagal's real-life attitude.



Jim

Chuck Norris vs Steven Seagal.

Chuck Norris has proven himself in unarmed combat competitions. Steven Segal has not that I am aware of. My gut feeling is that Akido is not the best martial art to study, yet it is an art.

Chuck Norris and Steven Segal are both martial artists, and this is just one more proof that there are MARTIAL arts(Norris), and just arts(Segal). One will keep you safe and the other will only keep you in shape, although looking at Segal one wonders what kind of shape. Hahahahaha...

[James Y]

Chuck Norris Slams Steven Seagal

This interview looks to be from sometime in the 1990s. It's highly unusual to see Chuck Norris talking like this about anybody. In fact, this is a first for me. Which says a lot about Seagal's real-life attitude.



Jim

Chuck Norris vs Steven Seagal.

Chuck Norris has proven himself in unarmed combat competitions. Steven Segal has not that I am aware of. My gut feeling is that Akido is not the best martial art to study, yet it is an art.

Chuck Norris and Steven Segal are both martial artists, and this is just one more proof that there are MARTIAL arts(Norris), and just arts(Segal). One will keep you safe and the other will only keep you in shape, although looking at Segal one wonders what kind of shape. Hahahahaha...

I heard from a good martial artist whom I used to compare notes with (and who met and briefly trained with Seagal) that Seagal had legit Aikido skills. And I trusted that gentleman's opinions, because he was very much anti-BS when it came to the martial arts. Of course, that was a long time ago, before Seagal ballooned up to what looks to be 400 pounds.

I rate Norris much higher, as a martial artist and as a person, than Seagal.

Seagal is (or was) around 6' 4" tall, and like I said, looks to be around 350 to 400 pounds, and is a proud former member of Meal Team Six of the Gravy SEALS.

Norris is (or was) my height (I'm 5' 9" tall barefoot, 5' 10" in shoes), and I heard that when he competed he was around 160 pounds. I saw him in person in 1994, and he was the same size as me. Some claim that he was 5' 10", but I don't think so, unless he was 5' 10" wearing shoes. Chuck Norris was like me, towards the shorter side of average height.

Let's assume that their theoretical fight takes place in the 1980s, when Norris still had most of his athleticism, and Seagal was in way better shape than now, and could still girly run.

Even back in the '80s, Seagal would have had a significant height and weight advantage over Norris. But height isn't everything, and Norris had superior speed, versatility, skills, and competitive fighting experience, even if it was only in Karate tournaments. Even before Seagal got fat, I believe that Norris would have taken him, but that's just speculation on my part. We have to separate Chuck Norris the man from the mythology that's built up around him from all of the "Chuck Norris Facts."

Norris is 85 years old now, so comparisons between them are meaningless, other than the fact that Chuck Norris has aged better, and is in better shape today, than Seagal is at 73.

Jim

[Naperville]

Chuck Norris Slams Steven Seagal

This interview looks to be from sometime in the 1990s. It's highly unusual to see Chuck Norris talking like this about anybody. In fact, this is a first for me. Which says a lot about Seagal's real-life attitude.



Jim

Chuck Norris vs Steven Seagal.

Chuck Norris has proven himself in unarmed combat competitions. Steven Segal has not that I am aware of. My gut feeling is that Akido is not the best martial art to study, yet it is an art.

Chuck Norris and Steven Segal are both martial artists, and this is just one more proof that there are MARTIAL arts(Norris), and just arts(Segal). One will keep you safe and the other will only keep you in shape, although looking at Segal one wonders what kind of shape. Hahahahaha...

I heard from a good martial artist whom I used to compare notes with (and who met and briefly trained with Seagal) that Seagal had legit Aikido skills. And I trusted that gentleman's opinions, because he was very much anti-BS when it came to the martial arts. Of course, that was a long time ago, before Seagal ballooned up to what looks to be 400 pounds.

I rate Norris much higher, as a martial artist and as a person, than Seagal.

Seagal is (or was) around 6' 4" tall, and like I said, looks to be around 350 to 400 pounds, and is a proud former member of Meal Team Six of the Gravy SEALS.

Norris is (or was) my height (I'm 5' 9" tall barefoot, 5' 10" in shoes), and I heard that when he competed he was around 160 pounds. I saw him in person in 1994, and he was the same size as me. Some claim that he was 5' 10", but I don't think so, unless he was 5' 10" wearing shoes. Chuck Norris was like me, towards the shorter side of average height.

Let's assume that their theoretical fight takes place in the 1980s, when Norris still had most of his athleticism, and Seagal was in way better shape than now, and could still girly run.

Even back in the '80s, Seagal would have had a significant height and weight advantage over Norris. But height isn't everything, and Norris had superior speed, versatility, skills, and competitive fighting experience, even if it was only in Karate tournaments. Even before Seagal got fat, I believe that Norris would have taken him, but that's just speculation on my part. We have to separate Chuck Norris the man from the mythology that's built up around him from all of the "Chuck Norris Facts."

Norris is 85 years old now, so comparisons between them are meaningless, other than the fact that Chuck Norris has aged better, and is in better shape today, than Seagal is at 73.

Jim

This is fun! I love debating and betting on the greats. It's good that we have them. They each revealed what their arts taught them. They were all very good. I'm not in their league.

Without a doubt a 350 to 400lb master of Aikido like Segal can punish most people with their art. If I had to face him in a bout, I would stay way outside and kick to those knees...hope for the best. With Norris, just run the best that you can!

Yes, they are actors and martial artists but I believe they are the real deal too.

[James Y]

Chuck Norris Slams Steven Seagal

This interview looks to be from sometime in the 1990s. It's highly unusual to see Chuck Norris talking like this about anybody. In fact, this is a first for me. Which says a lot about Seagal's real-life attitude.



Jim

Chuck Norris vs Steven Seagal.

Chuck Norris has proven himself in unarmed combat competitions. Steven Segal has not that I am aware of. My gut feeling is that Akido is not the best martial art to study, yet it is an art.

Chuck Norris and Steven Segal are both martial artists, and this is just one more proof that there are MARTIAL arts(Norris), and just arts(Segal). One will keep you safe and the other will only keep you in shape, although looking at Segal one wonders what kind of shape. Hahahahaha...

I heard from a good martial artist whom I used to compare notes with (and who met and briefly trained with Seagal) that Seagal had legit Aikido skills. And I trusted that gentleman's opinions, because he was very much anti-BS when it came to the martial arts. Of course, that was a long time ago, before Seagal ballooned up to what looks to be 400 pounds.

I rate Norris much higher, as a martial artist and as a person, than Seagal.

Seagal is (or was) around 6' 4" tall, and like I said, looks to be around 350 to 400 pounds, and is a proud former member of Meal Team Six of the Gravy SEALS.

Norris is (or was) my height (I'm 5' 9" tall barefoot, 5' 10" in shoes), and I heard that when he competed he was around 160 pounds. I saw him in person in 1994, and he was the same size as me. Some claim that he was 5' 10", but I don't think so, unless he was 5' 10" wearing shoes. Chuck Norris was like me, towards the shorter side of average height.

Let's assume that their theoretical fight takes place in the 1980s, when Norris still had most of his athleticism, and Seagal was in way better shape than now, and could still girly run.

Even back in the '80s, Seagal would have had a significant height and weight advantage over Norris. But height isn't everything, and Norris had superior speed, versatility, skills, and competitive fighting experience, even if it was only in Karate tournaments. Even before Seagal got fat, I believe that Norris would have taken him, but that's just speculation on my part. We have to separate Chuck Norris the man from the mythology that's built up around him from all of the "Chuck Norris Facts."

Norris is 85 years old now, so comparisons between them are meaningless, other than the fact that Chuck Norris has aged better, and is in better shape today, than Seagal is at 73.

Jim

This is fun! I love debating and betting on the greats. It's good that we have them. They each revealed what their arts taught them. They were all very good. I'm not in their league.

Without a doubt a 350 to 400lb master of Aikido like Segal can punish most people with their art. If I had to face him in a bout, I would stay way outside and kick to those knees...hope for the best. With Norris, just run the best that you can!

Yes, they are actors and martial artists but I believe they are the real deal too.

Another strategy to fight Steven Seagal is the use of a long stick. You can use it to dangle a Whopper in front of him just outside of his arms' reach, and simply walk away from him at a moderate pace until he collapses from exhaustion. Then you can beat him with the stick.

Jokes aside, I live by the motto, "Don't underestimate anyone." I believe that Seagal could do damage to most guys if he gets his hands on you. Especially if your clothes smell like KFC (sorry, couldn't resist).

Back in my younger days, I would have loved to have gotten the chance to spar with Chuck Norris.

Jim

[Naperville]

Chuck Norris vs Steven Seagal.

Chuck Norris has proven himself in unarmed combat competitions. Steven Segal has not that I am aware of. My gut feeling is that Akido is not the best martial art to study, yet it is an art.

Chuck Norris and Steven Segal are both martial artists, and this is just one more proof that there are MARTIAL arts(Norris), and just arts(Segal). One will keep you safe and the other will only keep you in shape, although looking at Segal one wonders what kind of shape. Hahahahaha...

I heard from a good martial artist whom I used to compare notes with (and who met and briefly trained with Seagal) that Seagal had legit Aikido skills. And I trusted that gentleman's opinions, because he was very much anti-BS when it came to the martial arts. Of course, that was a long time ago, before Seagal ballooned up to what looks to be 400 pounds.

I rate Norris much higher, as a martial artist and as a person, than Seagal.

Seagal is (or was) around 6' 4" tall, and like I said, looks to be around 350 to 400 pounds, and is a proud former member of Meal Team Six of the Gravy SEALS.

Norris is (or was) my height (I'm 5' 9" tall barefoot, 5' 10" in shoes), and I heard that when he competed he was around 160 pounds. I saw him in person in 1994, and he was the same size as me. Some claim that he was 5' 10", but I don't think so, unless he was 5' 10" wearing shoes. Chuck Norris was like me, towards the shorter side of average height.

Let's assume that their theoretical fight takes place in the 1980s, when Norris still had most of his athleticism, and Seagal was in way better shape than now, and could still girly run.

Even back in the '80s, Seagal would have had a significant height and weight advantage over Norris. But height isn't everything, and Norris had superior speed, versatility, skills, and competitive fighting experience, even if it was only in Karate tournaments. Even before Seagal got fat, I believe that Norris would have taken him, but that's just speculation on my part. We have to separate Chuck Norris the man from the mythology that's built up around him from all of the "Chuck Norris Facts."

Norris is 85 years old now, so comparisons between them are meaningless, other than the fact that Chuck Norris has aged better, and is in better shape today, than Seagal is at 73.

Jim

This is fun! I love debating and betting on the greats. It's good that we have them. They each revealed what their arts taught them. They were all very good. I'm not in their league.

Without a doubt a 350 to 400lb master of Aikido like Segal can punish most people with their art. If I had to face him in a bout, I would stay way outside and kick to those knees...hope for the best. With Norris, just run the best that you can!

Yes, they are actors and martial artists but I believe they are the real deal too.

Another strategy to fight Steven Seagal is the use of a long stick. You can use it to dangle a Whopper in front of him just outside of his arms' reach, and simply walk away from him at a moderate pace until he collapses from exhaustion. Then you can beat him with the stick.

Jokes aside, I live by the motto, "Don't underestimate anyone." I believe that Seagal could do damage to most guys if he gets his hands on you. Especially if your clothes smell like KFC (sorry, couldn't resist).

Back in my younger days, I would have loved to have gotten the chance to spar with Chuck Norris.

Jim

ON THE MONEY COMMENTS!

I don't know about sparring with anyone of that caliber. Maybe after I was trained and if I was 22 to 27 years old. I'm way too old now. I would love to have trained under Chuck Norris, there must be two dozen people that I would have loved to study under: Chris Cyborg, Mohammad Ali's trainer Angelo Dundee, GM Giron of Bahala Na, GM Bobby Taboada, Tim Waid of PTK-SMF, GT Leo T Gaje....the list is very long.

[James Y]

I heard from a good martial artist whom I used to compare notes with (and who met and briefly trained with Seagal) that Seagal had legit Aikido skills. And I trusted that gentleman's opinions, because he was very much anti-BS when it came to the martial arts. Of course, that was a long time ago, before Seagal ballooned up to what looks to be 400 pounds.

I rate Norris much higher, as a martial artist and as a person, than Seagal.

Seagal is (or was) around 6' 4" tall, and like I said, looks to be around 350 to 400 pounds, and is a proud former member of Meal Team Six of the Gravy SEALS.

Norris is (or was) my height (I'm 5' 9" tall barefoot, 5' 10" in shoes), and I heard that when he competed he was around 160 pounds. I saw him in person in 1994, and he was the same size as me. Some claim that he was 5' 10", but I don't think so, unless he was 5' 10" wearing shoes. Chuck Norris was like me, towards the shorter side of average height.

Let's assume that their theoretical fight takes place in the 1980s, when Norris still had most of his athleticism, and Seagal was in way better shape than now, and could still girly run.

Even back in the '80s, Seagal would have had a significant height and weight advantage over Norris. But height isn't everything, and Norris had superior speed, versatility, skills, and competitive fighting experience, even if it was only in Karate tournaments. Even before Seagal got fat, I believe that Norris would have taken him, but that's just speculation on my part. We have to separate Chuck Norris the man from the mythology that's built up around him from all of the "Chuck Norris Facts."

Norris is 85 years old now, so comparisons between them are meaningless, other than the fact that Chuck Norris has aged better, and is in better shape today, than Seagal is at 73.

Jim

This is fun! I love debating and betting on the greats. It's good that we have them. They each revealed what their arts taught them. They were all very good. I'm not in their league.

Without a doubt a 350 to 400lb master of Aikido like Segal can punish most people with their art. If I had to face him in a bout, I would stay way outside and kick to those knees...hope for the best. With Norris, just run the best that you can!

Yes, they are actors and martial artists but I believe they are the real deal too.

Another strategy to fight Steven Seagal is the use of a long stick. You can use it to dangle a Whopper in front of him just outside of his arms' reach, and simply walk away from him at a moderate pace until he collapses from exhaustion. Then you can beat him with the stick.

Jokes aside, I live by the motto, "Don't underestimate anyone." I believe that Seagal could do damage to most guys if he gets his hands on you. Especially if your clothes smell like KFC (sorry, couldn't resist).

Back in my younger days, I would have loved to have gotten the chance to spar with Chuck Norris.

Jim

ON THE MONEY COMMENTS!

I don't know about sparring with anyone of that caliber. Maybe after I was trained and if I was 22 to 27 years old. I'm way too old now. I would love to have trained under Chuck Norris, there must be two dozen people that I would have loved to study under: Chris Cyborg, Mohammad Ali's trainer Angelo Dundee, GM Giron of Bahala Na, GM Bobby Taboada, Tim Waid of PTK-SMF, GT Leo T Gaje....the list is very long.

Yes, sparring the greats would have been for when we were young. I'm about to turn 62; I have no use for that anymore. I sparred Bill "Superfoot" Wallace at a kickboxing training camp, but that was back when I was 19, and Wallace was in his 30s. And of course, he wasn't trying to kill me. IMO (and in the opinion of many), Bill Wallace was a better fighter than Chuck Norris was; Wallace was a champion full-contact kickboxer, in addition to having been a Karate champion. Norris never fought in full-contact kickboxing, only in Karate tournament fighting which, while MUCH rougher than it is now, did not involve the same level of conditioning as professional kickboxing.

There are a lot of misconceptions about Chuck Norris, one of which is that he was undefeated as a Karate fighter. Which is false. He had losses to Joe Lewis, Allen Steen, Tonny Tulleners (who beat Norris in all three of their encounters), and Louis Delgado. And I'm certain there were more fighters who had wins over Norris here and there during his competition days.

BTW, the late New York Karate fighter Louis Delgado, who beat Norris in competition, had free-sparred privately with Bruce Lee, and claimed to have been totally baffled and dominated by Bruce Lee. He claimed that he had never faced anybody like Bruce Lee.

So Norris's implication that Bruce Lee wasn't at his level because he (Norris) was a professional fighter and Bruce wasn't a fighter is suspect. Norris was technically a "professional" fighter because he competed for awhile as part of an American Karate team, and they received some payment for it. If you are paid travel expenses, or even $1 to compete in a match, that means that technically, you fought professionally.

A lot of younger people don't know that, and think that Norris fought professionally like a kickboxer, or like an MMA fighter (which is ridiculous, considering the time period he was an active competitor in: the 1960s, until around 1970).

I've seen several videos of Chuck Norris's matches throughout the years, from back in the "blood and guts" era of American Karate tournaments. It was a rough affair. Yet I've seen commenters claim that the matches are not of Chuck Norris, or that the footage is AI-generated, because he looked different, and the footage wasn't always clear. However, those are real films of Chuck Norris, taken with whatever millimeter film was available for private use at the time. Maybe some were confused, because his Karate tournament matches weren't "bad@$$" enough to match Chuck Norris's image as an action movie persona, or the aura of invincibility surrounding him that was created by the ever-popular "Chuck Norris Facts."

Maybe, as Norris has claimed, he and Bruce Lee never sparred. But in a street fight, who knows who would have won? The late Karate fighter, Jim Kelly, stated that in terms of sparring ability, there was NOBODY like Bruce Lee, and that many top Karate fighters of that time period that he personally knew had sparred with Bruce Lee in private, and weren't on his level. He never named names out of respect for the individuals involved. What would Jim Kelly have had to gain for himself by saying that, if there wasn't at least some truth to it?

I bring up Bruce Lee because I would have liked to have sparred him, too. If Bruce Lee had been alive in the 1980s, and I were in my 20s and he was in his 40s. Even though I'm physically bigger than he was, I'm sure he most likely would've kicked my @$$. But at least I would have been able to say, "I sparred with Bruce Lee, and he wiped the floor with me. So I can tell you from personal experience that he was more than only an actor." Or if he didn't live up to the hype, I would know that, too. But at least I would be able to speak from personal experience, instead of speculation.

BTW, I'm not a Bruce Lee worshipper. But I do wish I would have gotten the opportunity to spar with him. Joe Lewis, too.

Jim