What style of martial art you think that is the best?

Question

like kung fu, taekwondo, karate, tai-chi......etc and why you think that is better than others styles?

Answer 1

All of the different martial arts have their own strengths and weaknesses. All have been changed over the years. Some are now only good for tournaments and exhibitions, and some are good for real life self defense.
I know people who jump into a martial art because their Friend does it and they end up dropping out and trying something else, then something else, then something else.
They never really get to know one martial art well enough for it to benefit them. They say they have been in the arts for 20 years but don't know any one thing well.
If you are picking a martial art then I would suggest you go and look into all your area schools. They will let you watch and most will give you a free class.
I see things like this
Kung-Fu, Tai-Chi, Tae-Kwon-Do (good exercise, good for tournaments, not practical for real self defense)
Karate, Judo, Aikido, Brazilian Ju-Jitsu (good for exercise and effective for real life self defense)
What ever style you are most interested in is the best. What's right for one person is not always right for everyone.
Go and check out clubs for yourself. Do the one that interests you most and stick with it.

Answer 2

I think that the Shaolin temples were able to develop the most effective and fearsome martial arts. Their versions of kung fu are refined over many years and through many wars. They are complete systems, unlike the other ones which specialize in only a few aspects of self-defense. Weapons, inner strength, pressure points/dim mak, chin na or grappling, ground fighting, joint locks, empty hand (or foot) techniques, medicine. They are complete. These are not techniques just meant for exchanging blows like karate. These are meant to be efficiently brutal, which in war is needed especially when facing multiple opponents. So despite what some people think, using kung fu involves a lot of self-restraint on the practitioner because the knowledge/skills they possess can easily maim or kill. Therefore, these are not to be trivialized and used for tournament "fighting". Even the kung fu tournaments I've witnessed have to limit the techniques allowed to just strikes making them look like a karate or TKD affair.

Answer 3

Ben P is correct. Kung-Fu is the most apt. Because it has everything even ground work which most americans don't know because you can't look it up on wikipedia. Snake style and rising pheonix style have much ground work you can't tell me if you've been to a Kung-Fu training camp you havn't seen snake slither through tall grass grass to constrict opponent. An armbar well essentially an arm bar except well if you move your leg you can kill the opponent. The reason kung-fu practitioners don't show off is just that, they have to train for inner peace to achieve their "black belt", or passing/teaching grade. Any one who knows kung-fu knows that their is no belt system but once you pass a certain point of training they rank you as an equivalent to a black belt or sensai/teacher, the proper way being Sei-Fu. So really you don't see masters competing ever, well not real masters. In order to really master Kung-Fu its a full time affair, and takes years of practice. which it takes in many martial arts but it takes more so in kung-fu, like usually til lyour death. The only reason theres people shutting it down and say its for show is they don't know enough about it once again it's because its not on wikipedia, maybe you should hunt down a book or a scroll to book translate and look for yourself. Sorry for restating what Ben P. said but i was really offended by what that person said. he obviously favours judo of which he never stated, and to any one BJJ means nothing unless you know what it stands for. It is my goal in life to truly understand Kung-Fu not just the practical work but the theory as well of which no one does any more, and if that means training my hardest every day for the rest of my life to achieve this so be it. I think all thats needed to do this is a little work ethic and determination. and to make my answer less ignorant I would like to say that most people are correct when they say that not one martial art is the best. it depends on many things, the person interest, their physical build, the do's and don'ts of their moral beliefs and many, many more factors.

Answer 4

Do not listen to ben p. shaolin kung fu is a GOOD art, but not necessarily the best. and if you buy any crap he says, just read through what i wrote.

"Their versions of kung fu are refined over many years and through many wars."

All types of martial arts have at one point been designed for combat. and shaolin monks don't fight that many wars (except that legend where they saved Li Shimin.)

"They are complete systems, unlike the other ones which specialize in only a few aspects of self-defense."

Other styles specialize in some areas. then kung fu is divided into many, many styles, of which i think ground fighting is NOT one of them.

"These are not techniques just meant for exchanging blows like karate. These are meant to be efficiently brutal, which in war is needed especially when facing multiple opponents. So despite what some people think, using kung fu involves a lot of self-restraint on the practitioner because the knowledge/skills they possess can easily maim or kill."

Shaolin monks have actually entered san shou/ kickboxing competitions, and they never killed anybody. in fact, i recall one that lost to a kickboxer from hong kong.

"Therefore, these are not to be trivialized and used for tournament "fighting". Even the kung fu tournaments I've witnessed have to limit the techniques allowed to just strikes making them look like a karate or TKD affair."

i will now make an assumption. ben p is a fan of wong kiew kit. but i digressed. there have been matches where there were NO rules and kf was matched with bjj, and kung fu has been beaten badly. of course, one can argue that even if the rules allow any attack, the assailant may be arrested or fined. and even if he doesn't have this problem, people can't get over their conscience to actually do their brutal attack.

blah blah blah and all that crap. that's exactly what wkk said, and he can just keep saying that, and he won't have to prove anything. you know? i'm a great football player. i'm so much better than everyone else, i do NOT accept challenges, because if i tackle too hard, i might break my friend's back or neck. but hey, how come the nfl can play without breaking their necks every single time? it's the same idea here. don't listen to wong kiew kit. i don't know how well he actually fights, and i don't assume anyone else knows, seeing that he doesn't want to break any necks. but i'm saying that he likes to lie to people who have no concept of chi. he makes them believe chi is more mystical than what chinese medicine suggests. he's also giving people who will never spar in their lives, a false sense of security with a set of "one hit kill" moves which they'll be scared $h*tless to use in real life.

One more thing. anyone here know who shi yan ming is? he's a famous monk who escaped and teaches at USAST in manhattan. he regards forms which have "deadly" moves as just ways to condition the body. when you don't know what deadly technique to kill someone with, you go back to the basics. the basics simply means different punches and kicks, practiced daily until they are to fast to react to.

Answer 5

For the most part, it's the person that makes the art, not the other way around. There are exceptions. For instance, the way Tae Kwon Do and Karate are usually taught in America, practitioners of similar potential attributes will be beaten by a boxer, a thai-boxer, or a Jeet Kune-Do practitioner.

Answer 6

At the Dojo that I train at we do "Freestyle Martial Arts" which is basically what our sensei has compiled by taking what he see's as the best parts of multiple martial arts and has blended it into one style (he has studied karate, mu thai, taekwondo, kickboxing, boxing and personal training for over 15 years) .. I really enjoy doing this as we learn so many different things such as grappling & wrestling, Boxing, chokes, holds & takedowns, weaponary, kata's, many types of kicks inc. spinning and jumping.. etc.. I would suggest trying to find an academy that does "freestyle" as it has such variety or use it as a platform to find out which martial arts you enjoy the most..

Answer 7

It depends on the person taking it and what it is "best" for. For instance for the average person with average strength styles like Wing Chung are very good for basic self defense. For 80 year old grandmas a softer style like TaiChi might be best and only for health reasons. Grappling styles tend to be best for opponent nutralization and. Hard Styles (like TaeKwondo) are best for exhibition and body toughening.

Personally I prefer A combination of hard and soft styles and I only enjoy Martial Arts for its Exercise benifits So I think Japanese Ryu-Kyu styles are best for that purpose.

Answer 8

Probably the best martial art is......the one that you'll actually do!

My personal choice is Hapkido. It has a little bit of everything. Any of the Aiki-derived arts are good (I'd be leary of the softer Aikido styles), or Japanese jujutsu.

Answer 9

Brazilian Ju-Jitsu... Watch any UFC or Pride or any Mixed Marshal Arts (MMA) all of them have to have knowledge in Ju-Jitsu or they will be beat. However Ju-Jitsu alone also isn't enough most the time. So a hybrid of Ju-Jitsu and Kickboxing is a good mix.

Answer 10

I have a few friends really into martial arts, they study a type of Kempo, its basically a lot of small circle ju-jitsu. Very very effective in real life situations. Not real flashy or showy, but real effective.