Most deadly martial art

[shaolindogpaw]

Trying to settle and argument. The question is: What is the most deadly martial art? Not the most effective, not the oldest, not the best, but... the most deadly. As in, which martial art was formed with the intention of severely disabling or even killing your opponent?

My friend says its Shaolin Kung Fu and Jeet Kun Do... because it was on the discovery channel. Yes i slapped him.

I say it's a toss up between Krav Maga, Jiu Jitsu, or Chin-na. In a perfect world the answer would certainly be Eagle style, but we don't live in a kung fu movie.

[froffeecoffee]

My personal opinion would be Krav Maga since it is intended to kill/disable an attacker. Watching and hearing the experts leaves little doubt in my mind because of the constant attacks in the Middle East. It's a martial art of survival, not health and well being.

[Fightingfist]

Trying to settle and argument. The question is: What is the most deadly martial art? Not the most effective, not the oldest, not the best, but... the most deadly. As in, which martial art was formed with the intention of severely disabling or even killing your opponent?

My friend says its Shaolin Kung Fu and Jeet Kun Do... because it was on the discovery channel. Yes i slapped him.

I say it's a toss up between Krav Maga, Jiu Jitsu, or Chin-na. In a perfect world the answer would certainly be Eagle style, but we don't live in a kung fu movie.

I believe it would be jeet kun do or jiujitsu both very powerful.

[The Dragon]

The Dim Mak, maybe?

A skilled artist who practices the Vibrating Palm, aka "Death Touch".
Experts were reportedly able to time the opponent's affected by this technique, down to the hour, day, month week, etc.

[SimonMW]

There's no such thing as the deadliest art, only the deadliest person. The art doesn't fight. You do.

[KUNG FU BOB]

My opinion: As a martial artist I will speak from personal knowledge, experience, and my own capabilities, as I believe different arts are more or less lethal in the hands of individual practitioners. But here are my top 3 choices for "deadliest style".

1. Jujutsu In my training I found that jujutsu (Shinowara) was the most practical in terms of offensive application, with it's directness and total lack of extraneous movements/flair. Despite training in other styles, if I were forced to take a life (God forbid), without a doubt jujutsu techniques would be the ones I would utilize for a quick, lethal attack.

2. Varmannie My sensei was also well versed in a martial art of India called Varmannie. It seems to have been designed primarily for pure destruction and physical devastation- not for defensive reasons. My training in this art is limited, but I found it to be brutal, straight forward, and extremely effective.

3. Ninjitsu I have not trained in this art myself, but from what I've seen of this style through observing a master's techniques and skills, I'd have to say that this is easily a candidate for most deadly. In conjuction with ambush, and going undetected, I'd say killing is the main skill set for this style.

[jrcma]

There's no such thing as the deadliest art, only the deadliest person. The art doesn't fight. You do.

Yes the mind set of a fighter. a non-Martial Artist without Control can be more deadly than a Martial Artist with Control.

[crazedjustice888]

Well as a martial artist for quite some time now in different arts, I would say all of them are equally deadly. I mean the REAL martial arts, not the sport fighting ones. Killing/disabling an opponent was why they were made. Thats why anyone makes a martial art. To win a fight even if it mean killing. My personal style is Hung Gar. It includes techniques attacking the throat, face, groin, eyes, temple, spine, etc, but so does every other art. It just depends on how one goes about using it. But if I had to answer them, then I would probably say Hung Gar as being one because it was designed to destroy and uproot the Qing army if memory serves me. But for me to say it is the deadliest would be a lie, because you can only do so much with two arms and two legs.

[inframan]

Sorry to just copy from wikipedia but I didn't know much about it besides the fact that all it entails is drawing a sword and cutting someone down.
Iaidō (居合道?) is a Japanese martial art associated with the smooth, controlled movements of drawing the sword from its scabbard, striking or cutting an opponent, removing blood from the blade, and then replacing the sword in the scabbard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaid%C5%8D

[bamboo spear]

From what I've seen and studied, jujutsu and ninpo/ninjutsu. I always knew it was rough stuff, but once you start to see the advanced patterns, it's pretty mean stuff - shoulder dislocations, elbow and knee hyperextension, fishhooking the lips and eyes and ears and nose, biting the throat, stomping the ankle and knee at very bad angles, throwing over the hip and leaping downwards on the opponents throat or ribs with both feet (Bruce Lee style!), some pretty vicious sword and stick work, punching the armpits and humorous bone (never knew how bad that hurt before!), gripping and twisting the soft flesh around the love handles and throat and testicles, the "boston crab" and "figure 4 leg lock" for all you WWF old-schoolers, and all kinds of nasty jujutsu tricks involving the fingers and wrists and forearms.

Most of this stuff can be found in other martial arts, too, but this is what I've been doing since 94' or so.

[butcher wing]

I am a Kung Fu man to the end. but i would have to say Krav Magra, this is an art of destruction from start to finish. hell they teach you how to take a gun away from someone when it's pointed at your head. no ju jitsu, kung fu, karate, teaches you this. and I bet if you asked you Sifus or Senseis how to do this they would say do nothing. Kung Fu cannot beat Gun fu

[jiujitsu77]

while i guess it is no suprise as to what art i prefer, i would have to add that the art's efficiency depends on the ability of the practitioner. no art is superior....it is what man makes of it

[crazedjustice888]

Butcher Wing: I saw that video where they remove the gun from the guy with that exercise. The funny thing is is that there is a combination of tiger and crane philosophy within that one technique. How he shifts the body to the side to get out of the way is crane, how he grabs the gun to push away, is tiger. So you are right on how that style employs new things, but he is just using traditional techniques with a little twist to it, which I guess is like a of the newer arts.

[KUNG FU BOB]

Krav Magra, this is an art of destruction from start to finish. hell they teach you how to take a gun away from someone when it's pointed at your head. no ju jitsu, kung fu, karate, teaches you this. and I bet if you asked you Sifus or Senseis how to do this they would say do nothing. Kung Fu cannot beat Gun fu

Butcher Wing, with all due respect his above statement is false. In jujutsu we definitely train in disarming gunmen, especially if the gun is pointed at your head. Of course our sensei teaches us to be practical. If the gunman wants your wallet, just give it up. But if they are acting in a crazed, erratic manner (more so than your typical person robbing you at gunpoint! LOL) and you think you are going to get shot for sure, then you must attempt the disarming techniques.

[spearman lo tat]

From what I've seen and studied, jujutsu and ninpo/ninjutsu. I always knew it was rough stuff, but once you start to see the advanced patterns, it's pretty mean stuff - shoulder dislocations, elbow and knee hyperextension, fishhooking the lips and eyes and ears and nose, biting the throat, stomping the ankle and knee at very bad angles, throwing over the hip and leaping downwards on the opponents throat or ribs with both feet (Bruce Lee style!), some pretty vicious sword and stick work, punching the armpits and humorous bone (never knew how bad that hurt before!), gripping and twisting the soft flesh around the love handles and throat and testicles, the "boston crab" and "figure 4 leg lock" for all you WWF old-schoolers, and all kinds of nasty jujutsu tricks involving the fingers and wrists and forearms.

Most of this stuff can be found in other martial arts, too, but this is what I've been doing since 94' or so.

word to Pedro Morales and Greg "The Hammer" Valentine!

[bamboo spear]

lol, Valentine and the reversed shinguard of doom! I loved that guy.

[KUNG FU BOB]

Sorry to just copy from wikipedia but I didn't know much about it besides the fact that all it entails is drawing a sword and cutting someone down.
Iaidō (居合道?) is a Japanese martial art associated with the smooth, controlled movements of drawing the sword from its scabbard, striking or cutting an opponent, removing blood from the blade, and then replacing the sword in the scabbard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaid%C5%8D

You know what? Your right. I studied this as a component of jujutsu, but it is it's own art, and there's no denying it's purpose is to deal death.

[KyFi]

Now, if you're just talking historical martial arts, there's some criteria I would use. First of all, if it's supposed to be "deadly", I would want to see historical proof that it actually has been deadly in practice. Going along with this, I would rule out all empty-handed styles, as these were very rarely used in actual historical battlefield combat. Then, you also have to consider how the Asian martial arts evolved over the last century. In Japan, Kenjutsu and Iaijutsu, combat oriented swordsmanship styles, became Kendo and Iaido, disciplines whose main purpose was no longer killing, but was instead to be a form of personal growth and development. So modern Kendo and Iaido have had their focus move away from "deadliness", to stress other aspects (not to say that there are no effective martial techniques within these systems, but just that their goal is not purely combat efficiency.)

The Chinese styles have changed similarly. Yang Luchan, who was the founder of Yang style Tai Chi Chuan, taught swordsmanship to government troops in Guanping in the 1850's-60's, during the Taiping rebellion. So these troops learning Yang family swordsmanship were using these techniques in battle. However, as swordsmanship became less useful in the era of guns, Yang's descendents changed the form and practice to be less martially oriented, and with more of an emphasis on health, and to have the sword form reinforce the principles of the empty-hand form. This change happened in most styles of Chinese martial arts. This change has been even more dramatic with the Chinese communists turning traditional martial arts into performance-oriented sport Wushu, which bears little connection to actual combat use. So to a large extent, you're not going to find too many of the modern asian martial arts to really be the "deadliest". In some of the surviving forms though, for instance the Yang Tai Chi saber form, it's still very short and simple, with straightforward, linear movements, and this is probably pretty close to the original military use.

So, in my opinion, the deadliest martial arts---that is, the arts that were designed for and actually USED most often to kill people, would have been the spear, sword, saber and halberd styles of historical cultures that actually used them often in combat: the Chinese styles, Kenjutsu and such in Japan, the European styles, those of the Greeks, Romans, etc. Although they're not that common, I believe some of these traditions are still be being practiced here and there, and elements of them are probably to be found in a lot of martial traditions today.

[jrcma]

Well what is Martial Art? first of all what is art don't people have different artistic opinions as in what is art? isn't it someone opinion, is fighting an art? is the art of Martial Art the form's or kata's or is it the fighting? is any form of fighting a Martial Art?

[kungfusamurai]

I think the deadliest martial art depends on who uses it, where the damage is being applied, etc... You could say that TKD or Karate is the deadliest if you deliver a hard kick to someones head. Or if the person is on the ground, and you stomp on someone's neck, that can be pretty deadly, and that doesn't take any martial arts skill.

I would rather explore what is the most effective martial art that can incapacitate someone without causing permanent damage, rather than which one is the most lethal. When you're in a dangerous situation that is life or death, it won't matter what katas you've learned over the years, you'll just want to go for the head or neck, which are the most vulnerable.

KFS

[FrankBolte]

I train in Martial Arts since Im 6 and Im 39 in a few days...

one member here said its the person not the art and thats right!

theres a chinese/cantonese saying

一膽 二力 三功夫
yat daam,yee lek,saam gung fu
means
first courage,second strength,third kung fu

u can teach a guy with no balls krav maga or whatever he will most likely choke in a combat situation and you can teach a natural aggressive and strong guy table tennis and he will smack the krav maga guy with table tennis racket to the moon and back...

[Mark Pollard]

I would look to any modern, real-world self defense system such as Krav Maga or combat elements of Jeet Kune Do or jiujitsu that are used by leading military and civilian police forces around the world. These systems teach you how to kill, maim and subdue your opponent quickly in a life or death situation. They are not intended to be used for free sparring, sport or personal enrichment unless you consider crushing someone's larynx or displacing their nuts with your foot to be enriching.

Most classical martial arts have lost their battle edge if they originally had one because they have evolved away from killing systems with the introduction of firearms. There is nothing wrong with that so long as practitioners understand that. The practical art of Western swordsmanship for instance is dead. Although efforts are being made by fight clubs to restore it, no one will ever truly know how effective any of the techniques are unless tested in battle and that's not going happen in today's world.

In my opinion, military-based self defense systems that may incorporate a variety of techniques are the most deadly form of martial arts today because they have been tested and continue to be tested in real-world scenarios, also because they emphasize what works in a variety of less-than-ideal situations on the street, not in the controlled realm of the dojo or ring.

I also agree that it ultimately comes down to the individual and their willingness and ability to effectively use their training when needed, regardless of what system they use. That's part of what military training does is attempt to prepare the soldier psychologically to apply what their bodies have been trained to do and in the case of special forces training, weed out the weak ones.

[KyFi]

Mark,

You make some good points, but I’d have to disagree with you a bit. Now, I mostly study Chinese swordsmanship, so I am biased, but I’d still make a case for the sword and spear arts. You’re certainly right that most people training today in swordsmanship don’t have real-world sword fighting experience----but I would argue that the vast majority of people teaching Krav Maga, Jeet Kune Do, etc. have not killed people with their arts either. Those arts aren’t really proven to be deadly for the simple fact that, just as in the days of the sword, no military today uses empty hand combat in the field very much, except in rare emergency situations, as a last resort. Literally hundreds of thousands (millions?) of people have been killed by the spear and sword in the history of Asia and Europe, and all the major techniques have been preserved via the living traditions of Chinese and Japanese arts, and the writings of the Europeans. And I have worked with some guys doing European Historical swordsmanship, and I definitely would not classify those arts as dead. The Europeans of the Renaissance era documented their arts very well---much better than the Asians---and the people working at recreating those arts have a lot of written material to work with. And, they’re really doing a lot of heavy-contact sparring with realistic weight weapons---on that front, they’re ahead of us in the Chinese martial arts community.

Now certainly, sword and spear fighting martial arts are completely impractical today, and if you want to argue that the arts you mentioned are the most useful, practical, effective, or best empty-hand arts, I may agree with you. But if we’re just talking about “deadly”, I’d argue that there is vast historical evidence for the deadliness of the sword and spear arts, and there isn’t very much for the empty-hand arts.

I definitely agree with you (and Franky Lau) that mindset is hugely important, and the intensity of military training would be a major factor.

[VenomsFan]

I'm with KyFi on this and was just going to post a similar thread.

People are saying Krav Maga and Jeet Kune Do are most practical, but have never been used consistently in actual battle warfare for hundreds and hundreds of years.

Granted guns now determine a battle, but they don't determine how deadly an art or warrior can be.

No I'd go with the warfare tactics that lasted centuries (Samurai, Thai Boxing) where warriors fought enemies with ARMOUR for long periods of time. They weren't just long weapons, but all forms of true combat close range, long range, anything to kill your opponent and win.

I'd also take the stick and spear fighting (Escrima) and even dating back to the Zulu Empire (whom which the British Army suffered their greatest lost in the history of their warfare - and they HAD guns!) These guys could fight in many ways, had incredible endurance and stamina.

Other than the obvious fact these fighting styles are proven working methods (guns or not) hey fighters were trained to be true warriors.

Why not add kung fu? Well it was a religious art created to protect the monasteries from invasions. It was not an offensive art by any means. The movies have ehnanced the myth of this arts abilities, however.

See this is my thing with Krav Maga. It takes away long range fighting and is assuming you are in close combat - like a gun to your head, being held or jumped. It is eclectic like Jeet Kune Do, but is missing alot of practicality. For instance it is used as an attack method. Otherwise these soldiers use the guns.

Take Krav Maga vs. a Thai Warrior close range. True warrior tested and true would rise.

[Atherton]

I also agree it comes down to the individual applying whatever "style" or "martial art".

But you also have to take into account the times and environment in which an art develops and/or current it's state. Martial arts are probably well tested in dangerous areas or if you will "third world countries" now these days since various types of more conventional warfare are fought with firearms and other strategies.

I'm sure there are many areas of the world that are really dangerous yet have little access to firearms within daily life. Right?

[Mark Pollard]

Excellent points KyFi and VenomsFan both. I won't argue against the effectiveness of tried and tested fighting systems used in actual combat in different eras throughout the world. I was thinking of martial arts today where it's more likely that someone might have to apply techniques on the street or in conjunction with firearms use on the battlefield. No doubt, these systems have not been put to use as extensively because guns and explosives are our primary killing tools, yet a modern self defense system is more likely to be applied in life or death situations today because most of us don't walk around with swords slung from our hips.

[TibetanWhiteCrane]

because most of us don't walk around with swords slung from our hips.

Maybe not today! But we here at CITIZENS FOR SWORDS are challenging these opressive 'no sword' laws, and are taking this matter all the way to the supreme court!


Seriously though, I agree, that it is the man, not the art!

[KyFi]

...yet a modern self defense system is more likely to be applied in life or death situations today because most of us don't walk around with swords slung from our hips.

Very true---I certainly can't dispute that.

[butcher wing]

guys your getting away from the question, what is the deadliest art? not the most practical? all styles have a practicality and all arts have deadly techniques, maybe this is something that needs to be brought to the attention of Deadliest Warriors?

[odioustrident]

guys your getting away from the question, what is the deadliest art? not the most practical? all styles have a practicality and all arts have deadly techniques, maybe this is something that needs to be brought to the attention of Deadliest Warriors?

A katana or related Japanese weapon would probably win against a rapier or related Western sword (despite what some fencers might say). A Chinese light spear is faster in a distance attack when compared to any kind of similar style/weapon. Throwing weapons are questionable in any scenario, but a Bwaka knife might be interesting. South Asian close -combat knife arts, from my own laymen's perspective, seem to be really similar to military knife arts worldwide (?)

http://www.africatoyou.com/photos/VL68.jpg

As far as hand-to-hand combat, it might (?) come down to which military style had the highest number of deadly techniques, not which techniques were the most lethal in themselves. You could say that any mma style, since they all include chokes, is the deadliest martial art. Submissions should not be considered lethal technique, but they certainly would be if they led up to one.

Does anyone know the Mandarin (?) term meaning "five tigers descend?" It is supposed to connote any particularly vicious kung fu style. I heard that the term originates from a general who would make up for his short stature by going straight for the weakest points. I may have even heard about this on the forum, so let me know.

I think it might answer this question, in a sick way, to see techniques that target eyes and arteries more in modern military martial arts. No idea if it is practical, but I always thought that peoples' karyatid arteries could be separated by hand. The idea seems common (?) in kung fu, karate and silat.

[Mark Pollard]

guys your getting away from the question, what is the deadliest art? not the most practical? all styles have a practicality and all arts have deadly techniques, maybe this is something that needs to be brought to the attention of Deadliest Warriors?

<-- Blame the admin.

[jiujitsu77]

well....then the questions remains if being the most deadly IS the most practical. Is it practical to kill? can't any of these techniques when applied be deadly? Does it matter what type of restraint is involved?

ok i see what you mean like the whole kenpo "rip out your eyes and groin" type stuff....which APPEARS to be the most ferocious (forgive my spelling.....im VERY tired) in regards to any art. i guess what im trying to say is that maybe people think that practicality equivilates killing, while to others, practicality equivilates survival. there is a fine line between defense and killing, however sometimes that is the only defense

[VenomsFan]

yet a modern self defense system is more likely to be applied in life or death situations today because most of us don't walk around with swords slung from our hips.

another point to be made though, Mark, is these arts we're talking about. the warriors didn't just know how to fight with swords, spears or other weapons. i mean on these battlefields it was very common for someone to lose their weapon. it was imperative these fighters had to fight unarmed as well as armed.

it's just that we see movies of how they used to fight and think that is all.

i love using the Tom Yum Goong: Tony Jaa vs. 50 men in black in these discussions. that elephant boxing form was studied and applied on the battlefield should a thai warrior loose his weapon and have to go against enemies wearing armour and coming with weapons at full attack. even tony jaa touches on it's brutality and effectiveness. but that is the tip of the iceberg.

another example is escrima (phillipino) fighting. without the sticks, these fighters used their arms just as effectively. training the arms, elbows, knees and legs just the same. again for prepared REAL battle on the battlefield. have you ever seen an escrima master fight bare handed? it is some powerful stuff.

if we began to really study these arts unarmed or not, as they were trained AND used on truly violen battlefields, we would see that these modern, eclectic, new methods would not hold a torch to fight systems centuries old that could STILL break a man till this day!

[butcher wing]

see i love this, ive only been on this forum for a couple of months, and i am very happy that i can discuss with people who have knowledge in the things that i am interested and its stuff like this that i am interested in and love and that is martial arts (the systems and thats all systems) as well as the movies. my wife thinks i have an illness, i am just a kung fu nut. what can i say.

[VenomsFan]

see i love this, ive only been on this forum for a couple of months, and i am very happy that i can discuss with people who have knowledge in the things that i am interested and its stuff like this that i am interested in and love and that is martial arts (the systems and thats all systems) as well as the movies. my wife thinks i have an illness, i am just a kung fu nut. what can i say.

welcome to the family. it's funny, i was going to post something very similar a couple of days ago. the discussions are great for nuts like us. good debates, respected opinions, stuff to think about. good stuff!

[KyFi]

A katana or related Japanese weapon would probably win against a rapier or related Western sword (despite what some fencers might say). .

Katana vs. rapier has been debated endlessly among sword enthusiasts---a great cutting weapon vs. a great thrusting weapon---and there's not much of a consensus as to who would win.

While the katana is indeed a great sword, and Japanese swordsmithing reached a very high level, it's a bit of a myth that the Japanese blades were far superior to those of other countries. The Chinese and Europeans made VERY high quality steel and blades as well. Also, with it's curved, single edged, wedge-shaped blade, the katana was a fantastic cutter. But the Chinese jian and many European swords, which had straight blades, were better at thrusting. Also, the jian and the European longsword were double edged, so they offered greater variety of techniques than the single-edged katana did. I don't mean to knock the katana, as it was certainly a fantastic sword, but I think the European and Chinese swords have been a bit underrated. Here's a good piece on katana vs. longsword:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/longsword-and-katana.html

[KUNG FU BOB]

another point to be made though, Mark, is these arts we're talking about. the warriors didn't just know how to fight with swords, spears or other weapons. i mean on these battlefields it was very common for someone to lose their weapon. it was imperative these fighters had to fight unarmed as well as armed.

i love using the Tom Yum Goong: Tony Jaa vs. 50 men in black in these discussions. that elephant boxing form was studied and applied on the battlefield should a thai warrior loose his weapon and have to go against enemies wearing armour and coming with weapons at full attack. even tony jaa touches on it's brutality and effectiveness. but that is the tip of the iceberg.

another example is escrima (phillipino) fighting. without the sticks, these fighters used their arms just as effectively. training the arms, elbows, knees and legs just the same. again for prepared REAL battle on the battlefield. have you ever seen an escrima master fight bare handed? it is some powerful stuff.
[QUOTE]

Great points. Jujutstu was created specifically for the samurai to use if their sword was broken or lost in battle. It was an art designed to be used by an unarmed opponent against an attacker with a live blade. So there's not a lot of subtlety involved in the style. It's basically, strike to kill, or die.

[QUOTE=butcher wing;99407]see i love this, ive only been on this forum for a couple of months, and i am very happy that i can discuss with people who have knowledge in the things that i am interested and its stuff like this that i am interested in and love and that is martial arts (the systems and thats all systems) as well as the movies. my wife thinks i have an illness, i am just a kung fu nut. what can i say.

Yeah, dosen't that rock? Once in a while people just let loose with seemingly only negative stuff. But for the most part, this forum is filled with like-minded, fun loving people that are having a blast! I REALLY LOVE IT.:bigsmile:

[odioustrident]

Katana vs. rapier has been debated endlessly among sword enthusiasts---a great cutting weapon vs. a great thrusting weapon---and there's not much of a consensus as to who would win.

Yeah I'm going to have to take my comment back... :tongue: I haven't been involved in fencing for many years, and I forgot that rapiers etc.. are such a range of different weights. I definitely think the classic sporting foil is just too light, but I was imagining the other types to be too heavy with nothing in between. A good fencer could avoid getting his sword knocked around by a katana etc.., but I think the weight needs to be light enough for one to recover from clashing with any fast curved weapon. I think a straight sword would generally need to be evasive, although I'm assuming some clash is inevitable. I'm just thinking out loud here. Can't wait to read that article!

[KyFi]

Yeah I'm going to have to take my comment back... :tongue: I haven't been involved in fencing for many years, and I forgot that rapiers etc.. are such a range of different weights. I definitely think the classic sporting foil is just too light, but I was imagining the other types to be too heavy with nothing in between. A good fencer could avoid getting his sword knocked around by a katana etc.., but I think the weight needs to be light enough for one to recover from clashing with any fast curved weapon. I think a straight sword would generally need to be evasive, although I'm assuming some clash is inevitable. I'm just thinking out loud here. Can't wait to read that article!

Yep, it's so tough comparing swords from different cultures and different times---as the article points out, there's just so many variables involved, plus the swords from each country evolved to suit the needs and culture of those people in that time and place. Very hard to judge!

[BaronK]

Deadly? Silat with a blade.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R47XXT2tIbM&feature=PlayList&p=D25C378BC081F48D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYfy3AM-lSQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2DtCUfCyfk