Quote Originally Posted by Togakure View Post
I'm of the opinion that there is no "least," no "best" (USA). All martial arts have their strengths and weaknesses. Practicality lies more in the nature of the practitioner. A martial art is least effective as a form of self-defense when a practitioner clings to beliefs, habits, and expectations which work contrary to achieving what an art offers.

A related discipline in this context: I have known many musicians who are technically competent, who possess degrees from elite music schools. They are walking music theory, harmony and history computers, they play their notes to near-perfection, yet, they don't understand why judges and other established musicians rate them poorly. Mechanics are only the beginning, a foundation; the art is in making music, and some simply don't understand this or how to go about developing their true musicianship. Aside from those who simply lack that golden spark of true talent, usually it's because egos and self-justifications prevent. There's no room for more water in a glass that's already full.
That is a very interesting take on it Togakure. I will agree with you to a degree, but not completely. You are right that the martial art itself is only part of it, but I do not believe that that makes them irrelevant. Definitely the way that you train will determine how good you can do with the tool that you have, but it is also true that some tools are better than others for their purpose.