No you didn't, this all started, because you said:
Yes, it was a mistake to write "never" in my original statement; that's why I clarified my meaning in my
very first response to you:
I was speaking with regards to my experience in practical self-defense training.
And, in the same post:
That said, I can't preclude the possibility that some form of martial arts might use more elaborate maneuvers for self-defense training; I am only speaking on my experience.
This is actually really simple. You posted the videos. I said that a tournament environment is different, which I think affects the viability of the move. However, as we can see, I said in that very same post that other arts may be different and that I can only speak from my experience. If you don't understand the logical conclusion there, it's that while I was taught something like that isn't practical for self-defense, others may be taught otherwise.
You then indicated that you did not understand why I thought the competitive environment made a difference, so I explained why. However, I also said (yet again) that I can only speak from my experience, not for all arts.
Now, with regards to your comments that you
still don't agree with my reasoning regarding practicality in a real fight, well, I don't really know what else to tell you. I explained the difference pretty clearly. If that absolutely precludes the use of such a maneuver, I do not know. I think it makes it impractical--but as I have said repeatedly, I can't speak for what is taught in all martial arts. I can only say that I was taught that there are better ways to drop someone that involve far less risk--and in a dangerous situation, that's what you want. If you miss that maneuver in a tournament, maybe you lose the match. You miss it in real life, maybe you get raped and murdered.
I don't know, maybe you don't think that's an important difference, but I sure as hell do.
"Not necessarily"? The fact is that you can use it to knock somebody out, especially someone who is as trained as Batman, I would imagine that this shouldn't be an issue. What are you missing here? Batman is a trained fighter/ninja who can roundhouse people. What's wrong here?
Let me get this straight: You understand that Batman has used such a technique on someone in BB(which you never brought up until now), and yet, you're arguing with me that it's not something that could be used by him?
I'm sorry, that's not "perspective", that's just you trying really hard to win an argument that shouldn't have gone this far to begin with.
Listen, I think you should read more carefully before you start pissing your pants. I did not, in any of my posts, argue that the kick is not something that could not be used by Batman. In fact, when I first spoke about the kick, while responding to Moral's post, I wrote "Of course, it's important to recognize that practicality is only part of a fight scene in a movie."
Moral made a statement about the kicks; what I did is add my experience on the matter. I didn't say whether I felt the practicality of such a maneuver was an issue in these films; what I wrote, as I explained, was to add some perspective on the matter. I'm sorry that it's causing you to meltdown, or whatever, but honestly it's not really my problem.
As much energy as trying to fight in a 50 pound Bat-suit? I don't think we should discuss energy depletion when someone is walking around in a suit so heavy that it would deplete you more than fighting without one.
t:
