Wolverine vs Thor (Yes Marvel is doing it.)

Originally posted by Battlehammer
yes, they would becuase new developments would arises. Not to say they would not be skilled, but just becuase there extremely old does not mean they as skill as other much younger individuals with updated MA training.

also vikings MA styles I would think are not has good or technical as many asian ones by quite a bit.

First off, I'm going to point out - if you're referring to Thor, they're from Asgard, they're not vikings. I know they're similar in looks but they're not raiders that rush a village then take off with the loot.

The human body has a limited number of ways it can move. How long do you think it would take for martial arts moves to peter out? By that I mean... let's use my 900 years vs 100 years example. You're fighting for 900 years. How many "new moves" do you think will be invented in that time? How many new moves do you think are being invented now? Not counting slight variations of established moves.

At some point, and I actually think that point is now, the development of martial arts is going to become stagnant and the true advantage will be conditioning and tactics. The mixing of martial arts, probably part of the naming of MMA, is a big update in martial arts, I'll agree on that, but I find it extremely hard to believe that, in the case of people like Thor and Hercules, that after thousands of years of martial art training they're going to come across something that really surprises them. They can't be sitting up there in the heavens practicing the same moveset the entire time. That would be stupid. They had to experiment, combat was a big part of their lives. They were bound to go off the tracks at some point.

Back to the 900 vs 100, my point was - I'm pretty sure after a little while I'm going to have seen every move that could ever be done and the true advancements will be that conditioning and tactics. Maybe there'll be variations here and there but nothing major. In between 2909 and 3009, there will be no martial art technique that would cripple 900 years of experience. There's not going to be a Judo v6.3.1. Superior conditioning and tactics would be far more effective.

Originally posted by Doctor-Alvis
I don't think you're grasping this.

First off, I'm going to point out - if you're referring to Thor, they're from Asgard, they're not vikings. I know they're similar in looks but they're not raiders that rush a village then take off with the loot.

also I said viking because there the ones who created the concept for the Norses gods and based them off them selfs in nature. Viking were not raiders, they were as a whole sea farer's traveling the world.

Originally posted by Battlehammer

also vikings MA styles I would think are not has good or technical as many asian ones by quite a bit.

Really so you where alive then?

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Really so you where alive then?

Originally posted by Battlehammer
No did I say or even imply that troll? absolutely not but thanks for failing again.

Typcal of you not to get the point. You cant make a judgement about Viking martial arts and say they were inferior to asian martial arts if you were not alive at the time.

Originally posted by Battlehammer

also I said viking because there the ones who created the concept for the Norses gods and based them off them selfs in nature. Viking were not raiders, they were as a whole sea farer's traveling the world.

Thing is I kinda think your refering to all Norse people as Vikings...not all Norse people used to travel around some people wouldnt even leave the village. Kinda going OT here..

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Typcal of you not to get the point. You cant make a judgement about Viking martial arts and say they were inferior to asian martial arts if you were not alive at the time.

Originally posted by Battlehammer

also vikings MA styles I WOULD THINK are not has good or technical as many asian ones by quite a bit.

key words. called reading comprehension.

and people make jugdements about all sorts of things that they did not live to see. I mean lets see for example I think hitler was an evil man, but according to your logic I can't make such a statement since I was not alive during that time.

but please respond with another trolling comment.

Originally posted by Battlehammer
Troll as usual. and FAIL again.

key words. called reading comprehension.

Yeah and what exactly is that opinion based on. My point still stands.

Originally posted by Battlehammer

and people make jugdements about all sorts of things that they did not live to see. I mean lets see for example I think hitler was an evil man, but according to your logic I can't make such a statement since I was not alive during that time.

but please respond with another trolling comment.

My point wasnt really that you cant make a judgment its that your opinion isnt based on anything. Comparing Hitler to Viking martial arts is downright stupid. Theres lots of proof that indicates Hitler was evil.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Yeah and what exactly is that opinion based on. My point still stands.

My point wasnt really that you cant make a judgment its that your opinion isnt based on anything. Comparing Hitler to Viking martial arts is downright stupid. Theres lots of proof that indicates Hitler was evil.

No your arguement was stupid. You stated that one has to be there for them to make a judgement on the matter which is quite stupid. Actaully my opinion stem's from studying vikings and watching history channle comparisons between them and other fighters in history. It not an uneducated opinion, it could be wrong, but there is little to no evidences of viking being taught any real forms of h2h combat, and though they were taught to fight, there is little evidences on styles of combat taught like there are in many tradition martial arts. They fought msotly off instinct and did not spend endless days training in styles of fighting from all accounts. Unless you care to bring forth evidences stating other wises.

Originally posted by Battlehammer
actaully it doesent, I said I think, Did not say it as a fact.

Dont care im asking you what its based on.

Originally posted by Battlehammer
No your arguement was stupid. You stated that one has to be there for them to make a judgement on the matter which is quite stupid.

The reason why I said that was because there is little documentation on viking martial arts. You dont neccesarily have to be there but you need to base it on something.

Originally posted by Battlehammer
Actaully my opinion stem's from studying vikings

Oh really what books and what sources?

Originally posted by Battlehammer
and watching history channle comparisons between them and other fighters in history.

C'mon man its not without merit but I think you would need a bit better than that.

Originally posted by Battlehammer

It not an uneducated opinion, it could be wrong, but there is little to no evidences of viking being taught any real forms of h2h combat, and though they were taught to fight, there is little evidences on styles of combat taught like there are in many tradition martial arts. They fought msotly off instinct and did not spend endless days training in styles of fighting from all accounts. Unless you care to bring forth evidences stating other wises.

One of the reason why there is lttle evidence is because the Norse people didnt have any formal writing system to relatively later on, history was passed down by mouth and was not documented so sometimes its hard to find anything about the Vikings. Alot of the history is actually documneted after they converted to Christanity.

Some Norse people were professional soldiers and I find it unlikley that they didnt have formal training. Secondly there was a class of warrior called the beserkers and in some accounts they were so dangerous that you had to wait for them fall out of their beserk state to kill them.

Yeah, battle hammer you had to be alive back then to know anything about about the fighting styles. all that stuff that we think we know about it? We just made that up last Tuesday.

And if you wanna get technical then yes I know that the Asian styles were much more effective, due to a bit of personal experience and second hand experience. You see there's a group that are generally great enthusiasts of the medieval styles of combat. The Society for Creative Anachronisms. they have fake fights all the time using battle ready weapons covered in duct tape (To make sure nobody really gets hurt.) My Father had studied the Japanese styles and he'd cream the others.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/Unbelief.htm
remain skeptical of anyone who claims direct transmission of WMA. It flies in the face of reality and common sense. One of the very reasons that WMA died out in the first place is because Westerners are, by their very nature, pragmatic. As the nature of warfare and personal defense changed, the impetus for using cold steel weapons died out. Westerners moved on. And, of course, to repeat once again, Western societies have changed in ways that Eastern societies have not.

Another example are the obscure forms of "Norse" or "Viking martial arts" currently being perpetrated. Typically this is done by individuals who, coincidentally have formal Japanese martial arts training, and wouldn’t you know it, their "Viking style" looks a lot like kenjutsu. Yet, they persist in the claim that this secret style, complete with mystical metaphysical components invoking runes and Scandinavian mythology, somehow is not only authentic, but survived since the 8th or 9th centuries since in total obscurity. It was never evolved or developed further in the Middle Ages, or the Renaissance, or the Age of Enlightenment, or even the 19th century and seemingly never showed itself again until only very recently. How curious.

Originally posted by Doctor-Alvis
I don't think you're grasping this.

First off, I'm going to point out - if you're referring to Thor, they're from Asgard, they're not vikings. I know they're similar in looks but they're not raiders that rush a village then take off with the loot.

Viking fighting styles. You know why? Because the Vikings were Norse. That's right their gods were the Norse gods.

I pretty much didn't read the rest of your post since its probably all founded on this faulty premise that somehow the vikings weren't Norse.

The vikings were Scandinavian, they had Scandinavian mythology... you know, Thor and Odin.. who are.. the guardians.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Yeah, battle hammer you had to be alive back then to know anything about about the fighting styles. all that stuff that we think we know about it? We just made that up last Tuesday..

*sigh* The reaon why I said that because there is very little documented writing on Viking martial arts. Norse history isnt like Roman history where you have lots of documentation that tells you what they did in detail.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
*sigh* The reaon why I said that because there is very little documented writing on Viking martial arts. Norse history isnt like Roman history where you have lots of documentation that tells you what they did in detail.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Is there a reason you selectively read my post?

Because it seemed to be related to what I was talking about, and you usually have something insulting to say. If its a mistake it was an easy one to make.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Because it seemed to be related to what I was talking about, and you usually have something insulting to say. If its a mistake it was an easy one to make.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Oh I just find it funny that a group that studies Western martial arts is skeptical of some mystic "viking martial arts".

Well that guy was skeptical of mystic martail arts existing today, not of it existing in the past. If thats what you're refering to I agree with them.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Well that guy was skeptical of mystic martail arts existing today, not of it existing in the past. If thats what you're refering to I agree.

Originally posted by Creshosk
So despite the fact that we know about their combat tactics and equipment they used, we somehow don't know about a fighting style that couldn't have evolved past a certain point? And could only be around as long as the humans were anyway?

We hardly know anything about their combat techniques....theres a different between combat tactics and mystical martial arts. Both boxing and savate are western martial arts but there not mystical.

To be quite honest with you not to sure what you're getting at, think you might want to rephrase that post.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
We hardly know anything about their combat techniques....theres a different between combat tactics and mystical martial arts. Both boxing and savate are western martial arts but there not mystical.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
To be quite honest with you not to sure what you're getting at, think you might want to rephrase that post.

The earliest artifacts that we have of the vikings dates to about the 790s... and there's record that the viking age ended a little less that 300 years after that. As apposed to the Japanese artifacts that date back to well before that with the Jomon period the earliest point believed to be about 14,000 BC. This is consistent with the DNA analysis(Radiocarbon dating on the human bones that put the date to 14,000BC) of the Ainu.

Originally posted by Creshosk
I'm going to guess that you, much like Doctor-Alvis, haven't actually studied this field. Hell he tried to separate the vikings from their own mythos.

Of course you would your arrogant ive studied it in-depth actually.

Originally posted by Creshosk
I'm using mystical in the sardonic sense. Like "magical" there was a lot of change and development in the west, that would preclude the possibility of an ancient fighting style, as opposed to the east which didn't change as much and did have a long record of their recoded history.

Um I think thats my point.

Originally posted by Creshosk

The earliest artifacts that we have of the vikings dates to about the 790s... and there's record that the viking age ended a little less that 300 years after that. As apposed to the Japanese artifacts that date back to well before that with the Jomon period the earliest point believed to be about 14,000 BC. This is consistent with the DNA analysis(Radiocarbon dating on the human bones that put the date to 14,000BC) of the Ainu.

*sigh* Whats your point?

Originally posted by Creshosk
Google norse fighting style... what pops up?

Viking fighting styles. You know why? Because the Vikings were Norse. That's right their gods were the Norse gods.

I pretty much didn't read the rest of your post since its probably all founded on this faulty premise that somehow the vikings weren't Norse.

The vikings were Scandinavian, they had Scandinavian mythology... you know, Thor and Odin.. who are.. the guardians.

You probably would have picked that up if you read more than two sentences. Christ man. Don't believe in Peter Pan, Frankenstein, or Superman.

Originally posted by Battlehammer
post was restating the same arguement over and over. there no need for sucha long post. There are very big differences in styles, jsut because your old does not mean you have been studying and updating your h2h prowess's. simply means you been fighting a long while, which is good, but not if your not trying to evolving and learn new things. Thor been using the same style he always fought with, u dont see him training new moves, or training different styles which is the point, he uses the same style he was taught thousands of years ago. Feat wises he simply not up to par in skill with many much younger individuals in skill.

In cases like Thor or Hercules where their culture is based around fighting, with them trying to constantly outdo each other to prove who's the best, you don't think their natural competitive nature over thousands of years could have given them comparable abilities to someone who instead travels the world to learn completely different styles? Feats aside, we're talking in theory here. I don't mean just because they're old. I mean they have the advantage of time and the competitive nature and need to one up each other. And as they say, necessity is the mother of invention.

In the example of 900 years of MMA training vs 100 years of MMA training after those 900 years both people have the benefit of actively experimenting and learning hand to hand skills. Let's say they're complete clones of each other. No futuristic enhancements or anything involved. The difference is after 900 years the first one is like frozen in time or something and the 100 year one goes at it for 100 years. Will the 100 year fighter have the advantage because of some crazy martial arts improvement in those 100 years? I really doubt it.