I can only say that some Kung-Fu practitioner's would probably lose the the Ninja, and some Ninja would lose to Kung-Fu practitioner's.ġ: Kung-Fu can also be transliterated as Gung-Fu.Ģ: Ninja is actually a chinese word, derivative of Nin-Sha (or, occasionaly, Nin-Cha, though that one's fairly rare). You would most likely never actually see a Kung-Fu master and a Ninja fight if they were to, in open combat, it could go either way, as many style's counter each other nicely, and since Ninja were about effectiveness, they usually fought with a mish-mash of style's, codified into yet another style. For example, using a Kusagi-Gama (Chain-Sickle) could confuse youyr opponent using two swords instead of one could do the same using Kunai (which were a multi-tool for the Ninja, used for farming, skinning, hunting, and combat) to blend in with farmers, using Shuriken (often posioned) as distractions, etc. This difference of ideals means that their style was about effectiveness they were potent warriors, but much of their style was trickery.
Pretty much anything but betrying your clan (or hurting innocents) was fine, because the Ninja, in Japan, at least, were mostly civilians who rose up against the Shogunate where Samurai had honor (towards other Samurai only, realy, but more on that another time), the Ninja had goals the mission had to be completed, and honor meant little (this wasn't the case later on, as they were both romanticized by then pop-culture and a few noble Ninja). If you had to stab someone in the back, fine, if you had to poison, fine, if you had to infiltrate and sleep with your target for information, than slit their throat while they slept, fine. Ninjitsu was about effectiveness overall the Ninja was about getting in, doing what you had to do, and getting out. Obviously, there are probably dozens of styles that people could name where that is not the case, but dozens in the face of hundreds still means that the majority want face to face, presumably one on one combat.
One of the things to note is, that, for the most part, the style's are rather face to face they expect that, if you are fighting, you will face your opponent. There are animal Kung-Fu's (Tiger, Dragon, Monkey, etc), Drunken Kung-Fu's, Drunken Animal, styles based off of the natural elements (Fire, Earth, etc), style's based off of. The line "I know Kung-Fu" from the Matrix is essentially meaningless, as there are literally hundreds of styles and variations in Kung-Fu. It is essentially the name for Martial Arts in China. Kung-Fu (or Gung-Fu, they both work), it not any one style. Yes, I realize there is a MAJOR difference between their fighting styles, but that's kind of the point.Ĭlick to expand.It's not just a difference of styles, it's a difference of philosophies, and, well, let's explain. So, who do you think would win? Master Shifu from Kung Fu Panda. One episode was about the Roman Legion verses a group of Samurai warriors, and during our conversation about the episode, I asked him "Who would win Master Splinter or Master Shifu?" to which my buddy said "I will have to think about that." My buddy watches a show on the History Channel where Historians take one historical bad-*** and pit them against another and using "advanced technology" (ie, a computer combat program and asking a lot of experts) try to figure out who would win. They would make some tea, sit in the garden and trade training stories while their students tried to one up each other. Me, personally? I think neither would fight the other. The "other" option is available for those who believe some outcome would befall both CHARACTERS. What I am asking is, as we know them, which of the two CHARACTERS would win if they were pitted against each other. I am well aware of the differences in style, philosophy and application of both. I am not asking if a REAL practitioner of ninjutsu could defeat a REAL practitioner of Kung Fu. NOTE: The Subject line appears to have confused some people for that I apologize.
0 kommentar(er)
