Before I vote on this post, please clarify whether you think being a few levels above in fighting means executing a basic front-kick much better than others.
Ceteris paribus, being better at front-kicking makes one a better fighter. One would probably need mastery of more than the one technique to be considered levels up: rationalism 102, 103, etc. I just used one example of a basic fighting technique because the sentence flowed better that way; I didn’t put much time in thinking about and formulating it.
But the point was that no advanced techniques are needed to be many levels above normal. I see now that the comment might imply it’s enough to be several levels up with one skill alone. At 45 seconds into this video is a fight between a master of grappling and a regular MMA fighter. If they had made it to the ground together and conscious, Gracie would have won easily. He needed a more credible striking threat so Gomi would have had to defend against that too, and thereby weaken his defense against being taken down.
I meant something like:
I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times.
~ Bruce Lee
I have probably heard that quote before, but wasn’t consciously thinking of it.
How do fights end? Not with spinning jumping back-kicks to the head, but with basic moves better executed than basic counters to them. Right cross, arm-bar, someone running away, simple simple.
By analogy, for rationalism I’m emphasizing the connection between basic and advanced rationality mentioned by Kaj_Solata. If you don’t have the basics, you have nothing, and you can’t make up for it with moderate facility at doing advanced things.
Before I vote on this post, please clarify whether you think being a few levels above in fighting means executing a basic front-kick much better than others.
Ceteris paribus, being better at front-kicking makes one a better fighter. One would probably need mastery of more than the one technique to be considered levels up: rationalism 102, 103, etc. I just used one example of a basic fighting technique because the sentence flowed better that way; I didn’t put much time in thinking about and formulating it.
But the point was that no advanced techniques are needed to be many levels above normal. I see now that the comment might imply it’s enough to be several levels up with one skill alone. At 45 seconds into this video is a fight between a master of grappling and a regular MMA fighter. If they had made it to the ground together and conscious, Gracie would have won easily. He needed a more credible striking threat so Gomi would have had to defend against that too, and thereby weaken his defense against being taken down.
I meant something like:
I have probably heard that quote before, but wasn’t consciously thinking of it.
How do fights end? Not with spinning jumping back-kicks to the head, but with basic moves better executed than basic counters to them. Right cross, arm-bar, someone running away, simple simple.
By analogy, for rationalism I’m emphasizing the connection between basic and advanced rationality mentioned by Kaj_Solata. If you don’t have the basics, you have nothing, and you can’t make up for it with moderate facility at doing advanced things.
If you do it right, the same way they start: A single king hit.
Gotcha. Upvoted.