Something that was put on another link that got me thinking.

Over the years there has been a big change in what people see martial art as being. Be it from mixed MA, Traditional, fitness or sport are they all teaching a form of martial art??? I have seen many people that have made up a style or added to there style from what they have took from films, games, books and videos can this still be classed as a MA or are they just fooling themselves and there students. Did the founders of different styles do the same thing in there time or would they have given the opportunity???

This is just to see what people come up with no offence to anyone or style intended.

i don't think whether it's traditional or not, has thousands of years of history or not makes any difference to whether it's a ma or not.
Niether do I think it's country of origin makes any difference.

For example I think boxing is just as valid a martial art as kung fu.

However, if the training involves no physical contact (with pads or people), no training against resistance (ie someone fighting you at least to some extent) or no application of the techniques you are taught, then it's not a martial art, as you could just as easily be learning ballet.

Imagine someone learning to make a punching movement. That could be taught to a dancer and would look identical.

Imagine someone else who learns to use the punch against an opponent. They learn aspects such as timing, range, dynamics, all the things that differentiate between something that looks like a punch, and something that actually is a punch.

Hence my comment in another thread (that is probably what started this thread) that body combat is good fitness training but not a martial art.
It will not teach you to fight, it is not competative. It's as likely to increase your self defence skills as "wax on, wax off", and whilst karate kid wasn't a bad film (don't flame me for that), it was fiction.

Yes That is what started the thread but then I was also thinking about people that do a little of something and then think they are a master at it. Or they have the skill and technical knowledge to teach it, How can someone pick up a move from just looking at a technique jus 1 or 2 times of from looking at a photo.

And in this day and age people still keep falling for the patter and hard sell.

If all they have are books and videos or a couple of seminars then so be it. But in this day and age there are a lot of good people out there willing to teach what they have.

people who do that give the rest of us a bad name.

If you hit google there are any number of videos that will turn you into a deadly assissin in 24 easy steps, just $15/installment.

Anyone stupid enough to fall for an obvious con gets what they deserve.

Archery and Fencing are also martial arts, and to a degree, so are Javelin and Discus.

I say this from the perspective of Martial meaning 'Military' or arts of war and fighting.

I understand that Tai Chi is a martial art also, yet involves relatively little (if any) contact etc.

archery and fencing. hmmm... they are certainly martial, but where is the art?
actually, i've decided fencing is just as valid as aiido(sp) or kendo.
Still not convinced about archery, are there different techniques, or is it just a matter of practice shooting the target and you get better at it?

everyone will have slightly different definitions for things, this isn't a problem.

But i'd argue the point with anyone about whether boxercise was a martial art or not.

After a quick trawl, I found the proper "eastern" name for it which is Kyudo. AKA the Traditional Japanese art of Archery.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
After a quick trawl, I found the proper "eastern" name for it which is Kyudo. AKA the Traditional Japanese art of Archery.

this would be quite different though from the traditional 'western' practice of archery.

Practising a single skill doesn't make an art. Learning to jab doesn't make you a boxer and jabbing isn't a martial art.
If archery (and i'll admit i'm ignorant here) is learning to shoot an arrow then it's a skill not an art. If there's a lot more too it than simply learning to shoot that arrow, then i'll concede that it qualifies as a martial art.

I have had only a little experience at Archery but there is more to it than just shouting an arrow you have to know distancing, timing, accuracy, technique then there is the skill in draining the bow. I don’t know about this bit but I have seen documentaries about the bow being used in close contact fighting. But with this all in mind I think it should be classified as a martial art.

But then you have the sport side mmm????

judo is a sport, it's still a martial art though.

Have I not just seen on a Olympic bid campaign that karate wants to become a recognised event .

Tai Chi is very aggressive when speeded up you will notice .