Can anyone find any decent self teaching books for any martial art? Or is the general consensus that they're bull?
Already got a judo one, which I've properly trained in for a couple years, but can't get to a dojo anytime soon.
TL;DR need books to teach myself any decent martial art.
>>730667
>Already got a judo one
Name? I need as much help as I can get.
People are stupid idiots so they usually need at least videos to get something out of the material.
>>730676
I got a Syd Hoare one, Judo (self teach). Yet to use it properly yet, seems pretty good.
Honestly I wouldn't recommend studying books while not actively training, just to avoid solidifying bad habits, even if you're proficient with your training, if you don't have someone to keep an eye on you, you can fuck up quite a bit
Personally I'd rather repeat drills and stuff I have already been taught and know I can do well in order to avoid getting rusty than try to learn anything new
>>730716
That's a fair point. That's mostly what I'm going to do with judo, but I'd like to learn some new techniques and principles of other martial arts, even if they're mostly just basics.
Get the book about ninjutsu by Ashida Kim. It covers with your black belt certificate in the back already, I believe
>>730716
>Honestly I wouldn't recommend studying books while not actively training
This.
Unless you've at least a few fights under your belt (kickboxing, Muay Thai, or MMA rules) at least at the amateur level you're not going to get any benefit from a book about fighting that goes any further than conflict avoidance.
it seem pretty futile to train from a book without the ability to apply it in a physical situation
You're not learning anything without sparring
>>730667
books should only supplement real training and sparring. It shouldn't be a replacement. You will only be hurting yourself with bad technique in the long run
>>730667
what clothes are these guys wearing? is there a kung fu school with awesome combat cargo pants?
>>730667
>You Can't Learn A Martial Art From Texts, Video, By Your Self.
You can't see what you are doing.
Even if you could you do not know what your doing wrong. You also don't spar competitively.
Spend some fucking money and lots of time. Go to a good gym 3+ times a week for 5+ years faggot.
All a book will give you is a false sense of your ability. They can be pretty great supplements to actual training though, with someone around who can give you pointers on your technique and actual sparring so you can get instant feedback on your effectiveness against a resisting opponent.
>>730667
there are steps to learning a move
1. see the move - can be done by a book/video
2. do the move - can be done by a mirror
3. correct the move - cannot be done without an instructor
4. feel the "intent" of the move - cannot be done without an instructor doing it to you
5. integrate the move - can be done by yourself, once you know how to do it correctly
as you can see. the first 2 you can do, and on the surface everything looks correct. but that is as far as you will get.
you can skip steps, i.e. going straight to 5, but it would harm you in the long run as when you get corrected, you need to correct your habits too.
that being said, its actually very efficient to do it like this. saves both you and the trainer time and money.
for example, in my training of wing chun, i pop into the trainers once a month max. other times im working solo, perfecting my form. reflexes and combinations can be trained at home too. but at the end of the day, body mechanics need to be corrected by others.
there's an article floating aronud of some guy who taught kendo or something that goes into detail about learning from books.
base takeaway is, students who study books know basic moves, how to apply, but do them pretty shit and require correction from a trainer. they pick up moves faster than a vanilla newbie, and progress faster.
I've been doing BJJ, muay thai and MMA for a few weeks now
I need a book or some sort of video series.
Learning from youtube videos works but I need something comprehensive.
>>734599
and yes I do train at a gym too
>>734599
dont do that, you'll put down the books a week after they arrive and you'll never touch them again
Useful as a glossary for techniques, useless as a training tool.
You need to train against a non-compliant opponent to learn anything.
>>734323
I disagree
See the move
do the move/mimic the move
correct the move
intent I think should be covered under see the move and correct the move
but integrating the move I dont believe you can do alone
you need to practice it on somebody, starting with a compliant opponent and then with a non compliant opponent, then it's integrated
>>730667
Books are rather bad imo. Its really hard to show all the little details in static poses, even when accompanied by text. Videos would be a much better tool if there is absolutely no way to find a proper teacher and you must resort to teaching yourself.
>>730667
Edwin Haislets book for boxing.
https://archive.org/details/Boxing
Jack Slack writes great fight breakdowns. Here is one of his where he cites Edwin Haislet,
http://fightland.vice.com/blog/jack-slack-the-bible-of-striking
Stephen Kesting has a pretty good free e-book on the basics of BJJ, obviously won't learn shit without actually practicing at a gym, but it helps.
Is this a troll thread? I mean I could understand someone saying he's been studying karate or some other striking art alone, but judo?
I'm not even talking about sparring, but how can you think you learned anything about judo without at least practicing with a uke? You don't know what balancing looks like, nor what it takes to take someone off his feet.
>but can't get to a dojo anytime soon.
Why, are you in prison?
It is in fact possible to learn a martial art and effectively apply it without a teacher and or sparring.
A common myth is that one is unable to perceive the flaws on one's movements when mimicking the movements of a martial art, and that a teacher is required to detect these flaws in form and aid in correcting them.
Detecting the flaws in one's form can easily be done with the utilization of attention to detail and a mirror.
It would take some very severe cognitive impairments and or lack of effort to be unable to do this, given that adiquate information is provided.
Another common myth is that muscle memory is required to apply martial arts, and that one would be unable to participate in combat without getting a gluteus maximus kicking.
One reason people believe this myth is because of how much more quickly humans tend to react to a stimuli with muscle memory rather than conscious reaction time. They fail to understand that this in no way means that conscious reaction cannot be utilized. With higher aptitude for reaction time and or training, one who may have never engaged in hand to hand combat will be able to perform as well if not better than one who has trained muscle memory for hand to hand combat, not to mention how muscle memory can be used in combat if trained with proper knowledge and understanding beforehand.
Experience is only as credible as how it's interpreted.
Not saying that learning with a teacher isn't almost always more efficient.
>>736904
Not this shitty, ignorant copy pasta again.
>>736945
It's not my fault you can't into psychology.
>>736952
>I watched myself in a mirror, I totally know how to control a resisting opponent now
k
>>736955
Here's your reply, faggot.
>>736904
The margin of reaction time you're talking about would also require, not just being able to see and understand that a punch is coming, but a nearly unfathomable level of conscious thought
Frankly, that level of conscious thought doesn't exist. Past a certain level of speed, you only use your "low" brain to make quick decisions
If you were fast enough to actually problem solve and choose the best solution to an incoming punch, then you would be basically perceiving the world in slow motion, even when you WEREN'T fighting, because you wouldn't be able to control that shit
>>736955
Dude if you want to prove you're better than him then fucking refute him with science or something else
You seem like a tripfag, saying things and expecting validity because they came from your mouth
Lurk more don't post as much, in fact, avoid it entirely
>>737024
The entirety of human history refutes him. There's never been a self-taught fighter who does what he's saying. He's the one making an extraordinary claim, so he has the burden of proof. He's the one philosophizing, not those of us who tell him to fuck off every time he pops up.
If there were one single fighter anywhere in the world at any time in history who had done what he's saying then holy shit it would be amazing and we'd all be trying to figure out how that guy did it, but there isn't.
Literally, one piece of evidence is all he would need, but he doesn't have a Precambrian rabbit to show us.
Also every time he posts his catchphrase it makes me want to break his arms. Off.
>>730667
jiu jitsu complete by kiyose nakae is excellent.
books can be useful, but skills like martial arts require practice/experience.
>>737040
Seido
of all people here i had hoped you wouldn't fall for this shit
Oh, btw, got a job, starting boxing soon after i get my own apartment. i need a better bike lock tho, goddamm fuckers in the shelter looking at it like they fuckin hungry.
>>737040
>appeal to authority
>>737044
I know I'm feeding him, but what if we smile and nod at his idiocy and some poor lurking kid reads that and thinks it makes sense?
I'm just waiting for some food to finish cooking and don't feel like pretending to be a productive member of society at the moment.
Boxing's a cool idea. There's a gym about 1.5 miles from my new place I might check out. It's Top Team affiliated, but I actually know the kickboxing instructor from my sport karate days.
>>737045
You're calling me an authority? I'm flattered.
>>737040
>Also every time he posts his catchphrase it makes me want to break his arms. Off.
>anecdotal
>>737046
>makes sense
>all the logical fallacies from you
>>737048
No. None of those things are what you say they are.
Asking for evidence is not an appeal to authority. It's asking for evidence.
The fact that I want to beat you with a frying pan isn't an anecdote. It's not even part of the argument.
Also, look at the upper right corner of your dumbass graphic. That one's for you.
>>737046
You ever spend time in a homeless shelter? It's weird, there's like 2 sane people there, and both of them ain't really sane.
My hero complex is almost cured just from burning out
i posted my options in the boxing general.
I still say you should do judo. Or even jits if you got the dosh, you need to do some kind of homo experience.
No homo
I love working at a majority black place tho. Everyone is upfront they hate the place and just there till they clock out, laughing our ass out in the back room.
>>737055
>You ever spend time in a homeless shelter? It's weird, there's like 2 sane people there, and both of them ain't really sane.
I feel like this is an allusion to myself and sophistanon.
>>737056
nigga it might be
nigga it migh be
but no i'm in a litteral homeless shelter right now. Well RIGHT NOW i'm in a supermarket with wifi but i'll be in the shelter in 25 min
they make us listen to christian sermons 4 times a day
>>737022
>Frankly, that level of conscious thought doesn't exist.
People like Daniel Tammet, kim Peek, and Derek Paravicini exist (not to mention the countless others not mentioned).
Countless brilliant minds have existed in the history of humanity, including when records weren't kept/weren't kept very well.
Because of that, and the existence of Asperger's and specialized minds, I disagree.
Also, if I really have to mention it, "not saying that learning with a teacher isn't almost always more efficient" should make it fairly obvious that the post is acknowledging the limitations of average humans, and given that people average and around average are average in intelligence, skill, knowledge, etcetera, doesn't imply that average humans, when dedicated to learning martial arts and applying martial arts on their own, are or are not able to do so (more research is needed).
>past a certain level of speed, you only use your "low" brain to make quick decisions
No, but [citation needed].
>if you were fast enough
If I actually have to make this clear, I'm NOT claiming that MY brain is capable of an extreme, super-human high level of reaction time.
>perceiving the world in slow motion, even when not fighting, wouldn't be able to control that shit
Different levels of intelligence exist and have, with those being in the extremely high genius range, and as we know, speed is a part of intelligence (well, that's the general consensus right now).
Also, knowledge often compensates for intelligence. After identifying the punch (which is made a lot quicker and easier with knowledge), identifying how to react is made easier and quicker with knowledge. With knowledge, use of brain power (sort of speak) can be significantly reduced.
People who spar can react quickly for reasons, but really, do most people actually know what those reasons are?
>>737053
>Asking for evidence is not an appeal to authority. It's asking for evidence.
>>737040
>The entirety of human history refutes him. There's never been a self-taught fighter who does what he's saying
>because the historical records (that I've perceived) from an authority figure, or institution of authority doesn't have anything, he's wrong
>not having a valid logical argument against the reasons provided, logically
>>737053
>The fact that I want to beat you with a frying pan isn't an anecdote. It's not even part of the argument.
>>737040
>Also every time he posts his catchphrase it makes me want to break his arms. Off.
>>736904
>Experience is only as credible as how it's interpreted.
PIC RELATED
>>737053
>Also, look at the upper right corner of your dumbass graphic. That one's for you.
The fallacy fallacy?
I'm not saying that your position is wrong because you're arguing it poorly, I'm just saying that you're arguing your position poorly.
Also, a little related to the upper right hand corner
>personal incredulity
Just because something might be difficult for you to understand at the moment, it doesn't mean that it's untrue.
Fun Fact: Emotion clouds judgment.
As shown by:
>>737040
>fuck off
>>737040
>Also every time he posts his catchphrase it makes me want to break his arms. Off.
>>737053
>dumbass graphic
>>737070
Still not how that works.
You can't make an argument about the real world without evidence. I'm lowering my standards by inviting you to just have an anecdote and you don't even have that. Your entire response is "fuck off."
>>737062
>People like Daniel Tammet, kim Peek, and Derek Paravicini exist (not to mention the countless others not mentioned).
Daniel Tammet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbASOcqc1Ss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pzd7ReqiQnE
Kim Peek:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PhMnB1n2Bo
Derek Paravicini:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbqjxmTNivQ
Some Other Popular People (may or not be as outstanding as the previous):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBXZWB_dNsw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km9-DiFaxpU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UotQ5T-f1o
>>737072
>you can't make an argument about the real world without evidence
>what is logic
>your entire response is fuck off
>strawman
>>737041 here
are you guys srsly arguing whether you can pick up martial arts from a book? that premise is ridiculous. books can be useful but there's no replacement for practice. that's like learning to swim from a book - sure you can learn what to do but practice is still necessary.
>>737072
>>737074
>>what is logic
Lawrence and Clive are completely normal and average human beings.
Lawrence and Clive are in a completely normal and average 15ft by 15ft concrete plot of land.
If Lawrence cuts Clive's head off and then stabs Clive's head multiple times for 5 hours, Clive will die.
How ever are we going to know if Clive will die?
We certainly can't use logic, I guess we just have to get two people and get some heads cut off and stabbed multiples times for 5 hours.
Logic certainly can't help us solve this problem.
>>737073
All purely intellectual feats that have no bearing on the subject at hand.
Call me when one of them wins a fight.
-SG
>>737081
>all purely intellectual feats
>Derek Paravicini
>hears one complicated song one time
>can play it perfectly after
>Daniel Tamet
>can learn a language in a day
>can move is mouth muscles to speak it like a normal born speak after just that one day
Are you implying that parts of the brain don't control motor function?
You know, some people's brains are better than others, and parts of the brain that control motor function can be better as well.
>>737077
Please educate yourself in psychology before you make claims about the human brain.
You know, learning and applying things is done with the brain, and psychology happens to be the study of the mind, and the mind is and or is within the brain.
>>737086
my understanding of psychology tells me you're trolling right now.
could you read text w/ diagrams about breathing, breaststroke, how to float, and swim laps in an olympic pool?
could text/diagrams about shooting/passing/assists prepare you to jump into a bball game?
that's what you sound like.
>>737092
>my understanding of psychology tells me you're trolling right now.
Then you may not be very educated in psychology.
My understanding of psychology and human behavior tells me that you may be trolling right now.
>>737093
yea, nice try.
God fucking damnit this thread
>>737079
I think that Lawrence will die.
>>737084
Can they even play ping pong? It's kind of like there's a difference between planning and responding.
>>737086
>>737093
*raises hand
I have a BA in Psychology, summa cum laude from the flagship university of my state.
I have a BS in Biology, magna cum laude from another university.
I have a BS in Civil Engineering, cum laude from the highest ranked engineering university in my state.
I am a practicing engineer.
You'll disregard these as either lies or appeals to authority, but what they mean is that I've spend a lot of time studying the real world and what's really going on in it. There is no room for fantasy in my field.
I'm going to bed for tonight, but I'm going to say one last thing before I go:
Logic isn't true. Logic is consistent. Whether you're employing logic or not I'll leave for someone else. (hint: in >>737079 you aren't)
Where this all breaks down is that you're philosophizing about the real world now. About whether a thing can happen or can't happen. Ultimately this is either true or not true. You can make logically consistent arguments that proceed from false premises that still bring you to a conclusion that is not true. When this happens, it is your logic that is wrong, not the real world. All the jumping up and down and screaming and stomping your feet and demanding that the territory conform to the map will not make it do so.
If you're a troll, you win. I'm trolled.
If you're a child who really thinks what you're saying, put the books down and go learn a sport, any sport, and learn something.
If you're some kind of Asperger's victim who really thinks what you're saying, get some help from a neurotypical adult. You need it.
...and yes, those were all ad hominem attacks
>>737113
>Yes goyim, spend your money on more useless undergraduate degrees.
>>737113
>You can make logically consistent arguments that proceed from false premises that still bring you to a conclusion that is not true.
this is true AF and something alot of beginner thinkers don't grasp. logic is not the be all end all. it's a very useful tool but it has limits. wrong premises lead to wrong conclusions even with perfect logic. logic is one mental tool, that should be used alongside empiricism, experimenting, theory and so on.
>>736770
Just had an anon recommend this book to me in another thread! Seems really interesting, and it's free so
>>737113
>Can they even play ping pong? It's kind of like there's a difference between planning and responding.
I think Derek would have some trouble with that.
>>737113
>I have a BA in Psychology
If that's true, I'm disappointed in you.
>I am a practicing engineer.
>a practicing homosexual
>>737113
>but what they mean is that I've spend a lot of time studying the real world and what's really going on in it.
Sure seems like you could learn a little more about psychology.
>Logic isn't true. Logic is consistent.
Wow, do you have a BA in math as well?
>(hint: in >>737079 you aren't)
wew lad, Sherlock. You're such a genius.
Also,
>implying
>...and yes, those were all ad hominem attacks
>I'm seido and I'm so educated
>I but I still have no logical argument
You sure showed me, buddy.
>>737113
All of that text and still no logical argument against the claim.
>>737113
>goes into thread
>turns it into "my dick is big and your dick is small faggot"
>>737113
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? IтАЩll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and IтАЩve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and IтАЩm the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. YouтАЩre fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and thatтАЩs just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little тАЬcleverтАЭ comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldnтАЩt, you didnтАЩt, and now youтАЩre paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. YouтАЩre fucking dead, kiddo.
>>737219
this
Seido is a cuck.
Also, check 'em.
>>737139
>>737219
Just getting in on the education argument going on above.
If you can't find scholarships or employers to pay you to go to school, maybe you shouldn't go. Even Seido could do it!
>>737211
The logic doesn't matter. The argument is empirical. You're still demanding the territory conform to the map.
-SG
>>737070
>>not having a valid logical argument against the reasons provided, logically
>tu quogue
>>737079
>How ever are we going to know if Clive will die?
>We certainly can't use logic, I guess we just have to get two people and get some heads cut off and stabbed multiples times for 5 hours.
>Logic certainly can't help us solve this problem.
Your basing the logic of your argument off of the real world proof that someone being decapitated will die.
You aren't making an entirely logical argument with no support from real world evidence.
>>737211
Fine, you want a specifically logical argument against the claim, your argument draws predictions from a specific set of observations about how things were, and then how they later were.
But there is no logical connection possible between how things were in the past, or are now, and what they will be in the future. Induction is invalid (see: Goodman, 1955)
>>737323
>still nothing
