Some thoughts... on self-defense, traditional arts, reality fighting etc.

[CLG]

I keep reading from posts on this board and others about MMA fighting vs. Self-defense issue. I have also seen many posts that address “reality fighting” vs. “traditional martial arts. This thread may not be very interesting to many of you but please read and respond if you like.

I’ve trained for the better part of my life, primarily as a tool for self-discipline and fitness, at least that’s what my mother said when she first enrolled me over two decades ago. :)

After many years, questions started to arise, especially after High School where I unfortunately got into numerous schoolyard scraps. I have also experienced fights (during my bouncing days) where knives were involved. On one occasion I was stabbed in the gut, which ended with me waking up in a hospital bed later the same night. Unfortunately I did not have the time to see the knife coming… that’s a different story.

Please note that I am not trying to brag about my fighting ability or lack thereof, but rather trying to impress on you that I have had some experience with the realities of self-defense before I express my opinion. BTW, what is below is just a rant and is only my opinion on what I have experienced and seen.

Coming from a more traditional martial arts background, I have asked myself the question on what reality fighting and self-defense really means? I’ve even started to investigate and question the ‘MMA/NHB fighting vs. self-defense debate’, especially since I come from a traditional Karate and Kung Fu background. How can you know for certain if what you are learning is functional in a street confrontation, i.e. a FIGHT?

I have always been in the camp that says, “MMA is a sport and has very little to do with the reality of self-defense considering the ‘FACT’ that MMA/NHB does not allow for biting, eye gouging, tearing (fish hooking), groin strikes etc.” And also the fact that traditional arts are superior, considering we teach all the things I mentioned above in addition to other things that you never see in the MMA arena. We practice different self-defense techniques from the choke hold, the bear hug, right punch, left punch, lapel grabs etc. These could include intricate striking combinations, joint locks, ripping, tearing, and using the elbows and knees to all the targets that are illegal in MMA. Please forgive my sarcasm…

Until recently I was naïve enough to think that traditional martial arts training (whether it’s Kung Fu, Karate, Jujutsu) was synonymous with self-defense skill. Actually I’ve known for some time that this was untrue. I just failed to realize this fact. I was enamored with the cool drills, the numerous self-defense techniques that apparently gave me an encyclopedia of knowledge in self-defense. Enter my college roommate… who happened to be a very good HS wrestler. He flung me around like a rag doll, and put me into hold I’d never seen. We even practiced with gear so I could use my real self-defense techniques and not have to hold back. Nope, he had me gasping for air on the ground in a matter of a minute. At the time I did not understand why things didn’t work. I kept training for several years after this in the same traditional art trying to figure out “self-defense”.

Now (several years later), I understand why my blows and techniques didn’t work. I had practiced pulling my punches for so long that my power, distance and timing were completely off. In addition to this, I had a partner (my roommate) who was resisting and ducking my blows, as would anyone who doesn’t like to get hit. :)

These days I train primarily for self-defense. I no longer train in what people would call a traditional art, although we have elements of this in our training. I would say what I do now is more like MMA. We work on the pre-fight stage (fight or flight/fear factor/de-escalation of a fight), striking, clinch, grappling (standing and ground) along with some weapons (knife and stick). I’m sure many of you guys are going to say: “Here we go again…” but hear me out. It’s not so much that MMA is superior, as I believe the ‘delivery systems’ of many arts are useful. The primary reason for training with the people I train with these days is summed up with a couple of words, ‘aliveness’ and ‘functionality’. This means we do not train in drills or techniques, but rather work with opponents providing real resistance. Much of our training is probably similar to what you would encounter in a NHB gym. It’s nothing revolutionary, since the type of training I’m referring to have been done for years in wrestling, boxing, muay thai, bjj etc. I have encountered some traditional schools that train in this way but they are certainly few and far between. And you sure as hell will not see it in a Mcdojo.

One of the things that you will find in a self-defense situation is that there is no time for fixed stances and positions, and certainly no time to execute the technique or drill you’ve worked on for so many years… fights just aren’t static… or patterned. When you are wrestling for control of the clinch, you find the timing of when to strike within the mess you’re dealing with. This is what is functional…

As I mentioned previously, that NHB is a sport, well, you’re right. BUT, these guys already have the delivery systems in place. They already know how to trade blows, get inside to the clinch, grapple and submit if they have to. And it’s all done in an ‘alive’ manner. All they have to do is “add dirt” as I read on another website a while back.

Anyway, I’ll step off my soapbox now. Thanks for reading if you made it this far. Again, these are just some of my opinions. Please feel free to comment on it…

CLG

[joedoe]

Interesting post.

So how do you class the delivery system vs. the payload?

[IronFist]

Then what do you train when you train?

IronFist

[Maestro1700]

clg i dont know what kinda schools you were training in for 20 years but..

these systems arent popular for no reason, or because theres alot of fighting in the movies

the ones you mentioned..i dont have a friggin clue how you could get stabbed in the gut..when you were a bouncer? i mean your supposed to expect that mess..and unless you just got there and didnt expect or it or something..i guess it could happen but ma are supposed to teach you to expect the unexpected..but that kind of thing is expected! people who drink..arent in their right mind..and their are really just alot of *******s out their who carry switchblades(illegal in U.S.) batons etc

and kung fu sets/patterns/forms arent supposed to teach you, that when you get in a real life situation to go into a stance and wait for the guy to come at you or stand on one leg and go into the white crane

also..what you mentioned about spacing,timeing etc ?? like all martial arts are supposed to teach you to master these skills how the hell are you having trouble with them after training for 20 years?

i mean..it just doesnt make sense?

this whole post just stinks imo i dont get it..you make yourself out to be a sucker and you say you have 20 years exp in ma???

i just dont get it

[Fu-Pow]

Well I know Bruce Lee would have agreed with you.:D

I think you've presented a well reasoned argument based on your own experiences.

However, I think that invariably the conclusion reached in these types of discussions is that it is the individual who determines whether his art is effective or not.

For example, in my own art, in my own school....there are people who have almost an intrinsic understanding of fighting even though there form is not that great.

Likewise there are people who's form is great but get a bloody nose everytime they spar.

And of course, there are people like myself who are probably somewhere in between.

So you can have a lot of variation even within a style.

But your looking at even a bigger picture.

I'd say it boils down to this:

We have two camps in the extreme.

On one had you have people that are only interested in readily applicable self-defense. Minimalists. They only want to know what works now, for the street. They draw from various MA disciplines but never specialize in anyone. They train weapons but they are very basic and most likely stuff you would find on the street in the city. For example sticks, knives, canes, that telescoping staff thing, etc. And they draw a lot of their training from traditional boxing. Lots of conditioning. Endless repetition of single movements. Also, lots of one on one sparring, drills and "recreation" of urban combat scenarios. Overall, I'd call this type of training "Urban Combat Training." It is most realisticly used in todays day and age.

In the other extreme we have the "traditionalists." People that are interested in MA's for any of a variety of reasons, health, fitness, self-defense, a need to belong, spirituality, self-defense, enlightenment, to learn about another culture, as an adjunct to Chinese medicine, to feel part of a tradition, etc, etc. "Traditional" training can vary greatly from conditioning very close to western boxers to the very alien "standing meditation. There is a lot of focus on tradition and traditional methods that have been handed down for centuries. The expectation is that it will take a long time to truly understand and master the art. Training usually includes a fairly complex series of intertwined movements (ie sets or forms.) Training usually includes weapons that you would never find in the city. For example, Guan Do, Tiger Fork, Sword, Whip Chain, etc. Traditional arts sparring varies from push hand excercises to San Shou to full contact bare hands.


And then there's everyone in between that borrows from both the traditional and from the modern concepts.

So who are we really talking about? Which method is better?

Hard to say.....I think ultimately we're talking about individuals rather than "cliques" or "camps."

Yau Sam

[CLG]

Joedoe,
I'm not sure what you're asking? :confused:

In terms of delivery systems I practice, it would be boxing (punching), Muay Thai (elbow, kicking & clinch), wrestling (clinch & grappling/take downs) and BJJ for ground. However, since I've had long experience with Karate (and Kenpo) I revert back to this delivery system at times for striking.


IronFist,
We almost always train against a resisting opponent. We start out slowly and then increase the intensity as you get more comfortable. Only time we don't is if we have someone new and they need to be shown the proper way of throwing a punch/elbow/knee etc. in which case we do this on a bag or mitt. We generally watch and see what the individuals natural attributes are and work from there.

Usually we are given an instruction of "fight for a clinch", then it's up to us to get there in the most efficient manner. Of course we are taught the how's of a clinch but this is still done in an alive manner. Although I said earlier that we do not do drills, I wrote that slightly in haste. We do work drills like the 'pummeling' drills from wrestling. However, this is still done in an 'alive' manner. Most of our work is done in a fashion that most schools would call 'sparring' (or randori).

Even in our knife/stick work, we do not do patterned drills like sumbrada. We work 'alive' drills where we feed each other completely unrehearsed cuts and react appropriately.

I don't know if this explains anything... please feel free to ask.

CLG

[CLG]

Mastro1700,
Have you actually been in a real fight?
Of course, you're right. In theory, martial arts are meant to increase spatial awareness etc.....

The reality of the situation is that most people who get stabbed never see the knife coming. In my instance, I was handling several people at the time and all I saw was a dude swing what looked like a roundhouse to my side, I stepped away to take the 'blow' on the side. Little did I know the dude had a knife in his hand. So the blow turned into a stab... my mistake. Luckily I survived. If you put yourself in this type of a situation on a regular basis (which is the case if you bounce) you're going to get nailed sooner or later, hopefully by a fist rather than a knife.

Also, I don't think the last 20 years was a waste. As a matter of fact, I did quite well in sparring (in competition). However, this was all either point or semi-contact sparring, which isn't even close to actual fighting.

BTW, I don't think that you are supposed to "get into a stance and wait". Never have... that would be plain stupid. ;)
Although I encountered someone like that once...

Perhaps I am unskilled for someone that has practiced for so long but that's something I'm trying to change. To be quite honest, I think people would get a 'wake up call' if they actually stepped into a NHB ring. Even if you were allowed to do all the 'deadly' techniques. Try it sometime and see how you come out of it. :D


Fu-Pow,
I agree with you in terms of it being based on individuality rather than any particular style or systems.

However, I still feel most 'traditional' schools have very little idea of what a real fight is all about.

I still train in some of the principles and drills I've been taught such as push-hands, but again in a more 'alive' fashion. I even practice standing meditation every day. I do not disregard these tools...

I'm just saying if someone wants to learn self-defense or learn how to fight (which in my opinion is the same thing) they need to approach their training differently.

CLG

[scotty1]

Fu Pow - good post. The perfect mix for me would be a traditional martial art trained in an "alive" and "functional" way. Too many martial artists train in a way that does not prepare them for the intensity of a street fight. On the other hand, there are aspects of the TMA that I personally would not want to lose by training in a MMA gym.

CLG - I am glad you have addressed the flaws in your training. Its just a shame that for those of us that want to train in a more realistic manner there are few TMA schools that can supply that need. The TMA are losing good people to MMA because of this, I feel.

[ReverendTim]

CLG,

Great post. Your honesty is pretty refreshing, both about your expieriences and your training. I can totally relate to the discovery that years of pulled punches can leave you lacking when it comes time to belt someone.

I'm also slowly realizing the benefits of training in an alive manner. I've recently begun training on a heavy bag regularly, and that thing doesn't lie. It lets me know right away which techniques I might be able to ding someone with...it also lets me know where I need to work harder.

And for me, I'm considering a change (considering) to a place that teaches muay thai, boxing, and shooto/BJJ only because I live a lifestyle where I *don't* get into fights (amazing given the sheer amount of time I spend in crappy bars) and a competition environment might be the only place I get to put what I know into practice. Sure, no one's going to try to bite me or fishhook me, but it would be more intense than endless chi sao (which is plenty valuable, too, don't get me wrong).

Since everyone (or most everyone) seems to agree that where McDojos fall down is in the aliveness of the training, what are peoples' thoughts on what would happen if you trained in a traditional style using modern training techniques and full contact sparring? If we're all saying that punching and kicking in the air is useless (which I think it is after you've learned how to properly execute a technique), would it be possible to keep TMAs relevant by changing the training, not the techniques? Or is it inevitable that we all change camps?

--
Rev. Tim

[nospam]

'Expect a knife in the gut'? Oh my, someone has an unrealistic perspective. Anything can happen in a fight. Anything. That is why if you ever find yourself in a fight, end it as quickly as possible.

CLG - sounds like your trainingg was indeed unrealsitic - holding back punches and working with complying 'classmates'. To an extent, TMA incorporates this but at some point, and hopefully not a year later after some one just joins, you need to train..as you refer to it ...aliveness.

If "aliveness’ and ‘functionality’ as you describe means we do not train in drills or techniques, but rather work with opponents providing real resistance , then you are stepping up the pace from what might be called a more traditional - slower- pace. For at some pace, you need to just use what youhave trained. This is where the majority of kwoons fail their students, especially in gung fu!

It is not the system or style that is uneffective per se. It is the teacher and where the style has ended up. The majority of MAists that are teaching inefectively. The interesting twist is that almost all of these dojos, schools, and kwoons have 1-2 naturaly gifted practitioners (who would have been very capable in any style or MA), a handfull of good practitioners (who will be limited because of their teacher's limitations - not the styles. Many times these students jump ship for another teacher, of course it is commonly explained as 'I found a much better style' as opposed to a teacher who knows what and how to use and teach his style - a rare distinction IMO), and fodder who help bankroll the business of MA.

One of the things that you will find in a self-defense situation is that there is no time for fixed stances and positions, and certainly no time to execute the technique or drill you’ve worked on for so many years… fights just aren’t static… or patterned. A very simple thought, but unless you have actually fought, and perhaps lost, one you might not understand to the extent one should.

As I mentioned previously, that NHB is a sport, well, you’re right. BUT, these guys already have the delivery systems in place. Here I agree with you. Not that I hadn't up to this point. It is the delivery system as you put it, and it is the teacher who is the delivery system. Gung fu kwoons have fallen in to a horrendous pattern of just that - patterns for the alleged sake of patterns. The practise has become two-fold - 50% patterns - 50% 2-person and sparring. What kills me is that the patterns are not an intregal part of the fighting. It has turned more into a side goal of MAs. But it is easy to say this and to say that about what others are doing wrong. And in a forum such as this, that is all we CAN do :D Verbal debates, arguements, and points of contentions.

I'm glad you found your teacher - not necessarily a style that works. Keep that in mind. I am a gung fu practitioner, but I am one of the first who will stand up and call down, not a kwoon or style, but what I see as a misunderstanding of our training methods in place. It is an obvious misunderstanding, ergo such popularity in the so-called reality MMAs, and the reverberating discordance of TCMA and MA with the masses. But often we hear stories of people finding a great and real style still within the realm of TCMA - truely, they found a teacher who knows why he is doing what he/she is doing. This pans out to realistic training, practise done to the extent that is required, not midnlessly, and performance of what they have trained. Each step is progressive. This is key. If you train - including fist patterns and much else - one way but use different methods when sparring, then take a serious look at what it is you are being taught.

MMA. TCMA. MA - they are not different. They should not be different in the end goal. There is merely variety in method and philosophy. The difference is in the Teacher.

nospam.
:cool:

[rogue]

I hate to be picky but your definitions are all over the place. Self defense is not really fighting which is not really martial arts. They may overlap but they aren't the same thing.

"How can you know for certain if what you are learning is functional in a street confrontation, i.e. a FIGHT?"

The last thing you want to do in any kind of street confrontation is to get into a fight. This is my problem with many schools that teach "realism" is that they're teaching fighting and not self defense.

"We work on the pre-fight stage (fight or flight/fear factor/de-escalation of a fight),"

How? Are you sure what you're learning will work?

"striking, clinch, grappling (standing and ground)"

You're learning to Fight.

"along with some weapons (knife and stick)."
Possibly past self defense and into you being the badguy.

[CLG]

Thanks guys for taking the time to read my posts. I appreciate your comments. Like I said, it was sort of a rant on some thoughts I had last night... and I don't expect anyone to agree with me.

People train for different reasons, and I understand that. All I'm trying to convey is that perhaps people should look at how they train and evaluate what works and doesn't with a resisting partner. Learning how to throw an elbow is one thing, but trying to connect with an elbow against an uncooperative partner is a whole different ball game.... (I think you'll find that most of these will not connect, and if they do they are probably weak).


Rogue,
It's quite possible my definitions are all over the place... I wrote it on the fly without checking. In addition to the fact that English is not my native language (it's my third language) there may have been some mistakes on my part. I apologize if there were any incongruencies in my posts. I didn't think there were, as I feel pretty strongly about the subject, but I'm only human... ;)

I agree with you that the last thing you want to do is to get in a fight. We always teach this as first resort. Many times you can't run and imho this is what you train for. If you don't know how to fight, then how are you expecting to defend yourself if caught in a precarious situation?

In terms of the 'how' we work on the psychology of fear, de-escalation etc. I am not an expert in this area. This is new to me as well, but my coach is a certified PDR instructor under Tony Blauer. Check out his website at http://www.tonyblauer.com/ for more information. What I have seen of it seems to prepare you for the real thing... but who can tell. All I can say is that many of the scenario type training (we call them micro-fights) definitely gets your adrenaline going... other times we work on awareness, communication, body language etc. It works for me...

Finally, in terms of training to 'fight' with a knife and stick.... well, we sure as hell aren't learning it to square off with someone to duel with knives. If you think this is what we do, then NO this isn't it. We learn to use blades such as a tactical folder so in the event you can run away from the fight you can arm yourself while running to the car, your house, subway or whatever. It's definitely NOT to stand there and fight while being armed with a knife. As you suggest, this would be common with a regular thug.

Hopefully, I've cleared up some of the things that you brought up.

Train hard, and keep safe!
CLG

[BeiKongHui]

Why, exactly, do you think we care?

Also, does TB still leave his thumbs out when he punches?

[apoweyn]

why, exactly, wouldn't we care?

yes, it sounds like matt thornton. that hardly invalidates the discussion.

if you don't care, move on.


stuart b.

[Merryprankster]

BeiKongHui--it's a public forum. Suck it up. You obviously care, or you wouldn't have bothered to address it.

Rogue is correct, by the way--self-defense doesn't equate to fighting which may not equate to an MA. But Tony Blauer is no slouch. I don't agree with all his approaches, but it's not shabby at all.

BTW--there's nothing wrong with having some patterns--they are templates. I have an armbar-triangle-omoplata-triangle-armbar combo that is clearly a set pattern. Nice to know what's coming next---but you can't be so locked into it that you can't adjust, and that's the corker.

Nice post--I'd say the requirements to be a good fighter in any system is to strap on the gear with reasonably limited rules and beat on each other, AND invite people from other styles to do the same.

[BeiKongHui]

MMA has taken hucksterism and McDojoism into the next century now we get these used car salesman/ televangelist style proselytizers trying to show us the way.

They once were lost and now have found salvation and they want to share it with you. Well, folks I do MMA too but I got to tell you I am sick to death of hearing the same ol tired spiel from everyone who couldn't a) make whatever they originally learned work b)had a crappy teacher so it all must suck c)got a BB in Tae Kwon Do and thought they were doing "traditional martial arts" d)post to get attention for their teachers special training methods that really are just like the methods that've been used all over the world since man first started to fight.

I still want to know why I should care? What is your motivation for preaching to the heathens?

[Merryprankster]

MMA has taken hucksterism into the next century?

Mind explaining that? How is MMA more hucksterish than "one strike kill," or "We can't spar with our techniques, they are too deadly?"

However, I'll agree we don't need the hard sell all the time.

[DelicateSound]

In a way I agree with him, as many schools suddenly found the "secret grappling forms" in their art during the grappling craze, and many phoney schools just capitalised on the craze.


That said - Kung Fu is just as bad. Out of the 4 styles I've trianed in all were VERY commercialised and 1 was a FULL ON Mc.Dojo.


Sad really.




Judo class - £1.00 for 3 hours of training in a dank, dark extended closet above a bayliffs. If that ain't what martial arts are about, what is? :)

[apoweyn]

i think beikonghui makes a good point too. i just can't figure out why he'd open it up with that inane 'who cares' post. if you've got something on your mind, then out with it. as it turns out, he had something pretty substantial on his mind.

beikonghui, i agree with you that it gets tired hearing people from 'modern' styles go off about how unrealistic or dead traditional styles are. likewise, it gets very tired listening to traditionalists tell us that we just don't get it simply because we don't agree with it.

MMA may be new to hucksterism, but others have been doing it for ages. is one worse than the other?

and all of that aside, the thread has generated some worthwhile posts.


stuart b.

[Polaris]

I don't like involved in these, but I will add a few things anyway.


I've been on both sides of the coin. I currently train in MMA and
have done traditional training in the past (which I do plan on
resuming in the future).

The problem with traditional styles is the amount of bull****
and "McDojos" out there. Of all the traditional schools I've been
to only one of them was good.


Originally posted by apoweyn

beikonghui, i agree with you that it gets tired hearing people from 'modern' styles go off about how unrealistic or dead traditional styles are.


I consider myself to be neutral on this topic. I get tired of the MMA
people saying all traditional stuff is no good, and likewise am
tired of traditionalists putting down MMA. i.e."Sport fighting and real fighting are two different things". Well how many of you whom make that statement roam the streets getting into "real" fights on a regular basis? Do you honestly believe that MMA people can't handle themselves outside of the ring?

The other issue being ground-fighting. One of the popular arguments being "well his mates will come river dance on your
head". Do you honestly believe that you will be better off by NOT supplementing your training with groundwork than you
would be if you did?

[apoweyn]

polaris,

i consider myself neutral on the topic as well, but your quote from me only features half of my statement.

the division really should never have been between TMA and MMA, but between legit and illegit people.


stuart b.

[Polaris]

Originally posted by apoweyn

i consider myself neutral on the topic as well, but your quote from me only features half of my statement.


I understand, I left the second part out because I don't feel that way. It's the other type of comments (ring vs. street etc.) that annoy me.

[BeiKongHui]

I don't have to, read a magazine or visit most web forum and you'll find a MMA huckster. Firstly, a hucster is a peddler, someone who is hawking their wares (or system). Matt Thornton is a classic hucster (see his posts on the BIG JKD site for example) he trashes whatever you've done before and expects you to take him as an expert on your art regardless of rather he knows what he's talking about or not. So maybe he can shake up the less self confident and wind up with their $.

ALL the no touch guys (Dillman, Mooney, etc.) are not just hucksters but charlatans as well. As for one strike to kill I've never heard that in any place I've trained and I'd leave as soon as I did.

Here are some other hucksterish, McDojo and out and out fradulant things I'm tired of hearing:

1)I taught XXX's military/this is the same system used by XXX's military.
2)90% of fights go to the ground
3)Submit anyone
4)KO anyone out/be the fastest puncher (you know the Speed Dr.)
5)Never be taken down
6)Anything that teaches a woman to use the guard on the street in any way other than a last ditch senerio
7)Size & strength don't matter
8)I learned this style from a secret organization, mystical teacher, etc.
9)XXX is the most effective martial art.
10) **** Clarke is still alive
11) My teacher was so & so...
12) This style is best because so & so uses it

and many, many more

[BeiKongHui]

the division really should never have been between TMA and MMA, but between legit and illegit people.


D*mn skippy, m'man.

[rogue]

CLG, my apologies for my tone. I wasn't really blasting what you said but trying to make it to a lunch date. My bad.

Several of us here have been discussing the very thing that you've brought up but from a different angle. Many folks can train many years not understanding that what they're working towards in their art is not the result they're trying to get out of it.

For example, if your goal is self defense(protecting oneself from harm) then training submissions or kickboxing is not what you want since they're fighting arts with a mind set of engaging someone and defeating them. Same thing for the schools that teach control and compliance techniques which may be great for a LEO and bouncers but it's not something I'd do in a self defense situation.

With that said these things can be used as a part of your self defense, a submission fighter can use a takedown to drop someone hard, a karateka can front kick the bladder or solar plexus and buy themselves time to escape. So their training isn't a waste of time, or without application during a street confrontation.



PS Sounds like you have the right idea about carrying a knife.

[CLG]

BeiKongHui,
Dude, relax. As it was mentioned, it's public forum. I was bored, so I decided to write something that was on my mind.
Who is TB?

I am aware of Matt Thornton, and I believe his stuff is similar to what my instructor does. However, I am not affiliated with his organization. Although I attended a seminar with one of his instructors. BTW, I don't see where I'm trying to sell you guys on anything...

FWIW, as for my previous training, well, I wouldn't call them McDojo's. Most of my training has been in 'clubs' not commerical schools, so that argument is out the window. I also had the opportunity to live and train in Japan for a over year in the late 80's, with a Kyokushin and a Kendo club.


Merryprankster,
How does self-defense not equate to fighting? Please explain...

Thanks,
CLG

[Mantis9]

Okay, first I'd like to say I'm technically a traditionalist, being that I'm an 7* PM exponent, but here's my thought.

PM was a modern MA at one point. If I didn't believe in improving a style to fit one's needs like MMA, then I would be a hypocrite practicing PM. (I am, of course, a hypoocrite, but for totally different reasons;) .)Discovering the hiddening grappling form, doing live drills, sparring, and all the rest are good. I see something I like in another MA's training I take it and make it Mantis. I want to be good and I want to be mantis, because that's where I feel at home.

I totally agree with MA being divided into the legit-illegit camps. Any legit MA would have no problem making the distinction. I try to leave my ego at the door and be willing to be wrong when it comes to these matters.

Mantis9

[Braden]

Apoweyn said: "the division really should never have been between TMA and MMA, but between legit and illegit people."

And it's worth quoting again.

[KC Elbows]

CLG,

Not to answer for Merry, but he's not here to stop me. Self defense assumes your main priority is to get out of there. Fighting assumes your main goal is to win.

Legally, if you are in danger, to seek escape by opening up and escape is safer both for your own health, and for your criminal record. To stay just to win keeps you in danger when you might have escaped.

In otherwords, if you're actually having to use this stuff, either you got into a silly contest of egos, or you are actually being attacked. If its a contest of egos, its not self defense, its mutual aggression. If you are being attacked, the locale is probably not a safe one EVEN IF you dispatch your present attacker(s), so you're best getting the heck out of there and chucking the idea of victory.

BTW Merry, that's a fantastic website. Far more mature than I would expect from someone named "animal".

[Braden]

"How does self-defense not equate to fighting?"

Fighting is simply a very, very small part of self-defense. Skill in one is quite independant from skill in the other. If someone is serious about killing/mugging/raping/etc you, skill in fighting will be of negligible use without skill in self-defense. I'm surprised that someone with your background thinks otherwise and would be interested in your thoughts.

[CLG]

Rogue,
No worries. And I understand where you're coming from. Thanks for elaborating it for me.


KC Elbows,
Thanks for the explanation. I do agree with the fact that you should run the first chance you get. Many times you just don't have an option...


Braden,
Thanks for your explanation as well.
To be quite honest, self-defense was not something I was training for when I was younger, and only in the last few years have I really started to study the 'self-defense' aspects.

Personally I feel that the gap between self-defense and 'fighting' skill is not that far apart. It's possible I have confused things in this thread by referring to what I do as 'fighting'. Perhaps, 'self-preservation skills against random acts of physical violence' would be a better term, I am in no way suggesting a street fight where thugs square up and 'fight'.
Either way, imho it comes down to either getting away from the threat before it happens or how to effectively dispatch the assailant (using whatever is necessary).

By training in an environment that works in an 'alive' fashion, you will at least become accustomed to dealing with someone that is resisting... and be able to find your own delivery system that you know will work because you've actually done it.

CLG

[Braden]

CLG - I think the insight that you mistook a knife for an empty hand is an important one. Do you think the skills you work on now will work well if you made this confusion again? In terms of psychological and physical response, do you find that what you train now is similar to when you were stabbed? Alot of people talk about 'aliveness' as being related to the 'resistance' your training partner offers, but to me the concept relates alot to questions like the two above.

[curtis]

CLG
reality based martial art's. Humm.?! "WELL" here is something I don't believe anyone else has brought up,
Emotional content.
The primal emotions of hate, anger, and fear. Must be brought up in you are truly looking into the reality element. (YES preparing for the worst-case scenario is important, and practice does make perfect. but for now let's quit playing all the WHAT IF'S) and look into other means of preparing for real life situations.

Role playing can be a good training method.
(Acting out, as if you work in a play. Assuming roles, Using the environment for the proper situation. Example and alley , for a mugging, or rape.)

As well as using your emotions. Not only for power, but for speed (or the lack of it. All depending on your reactions. How do you react?)

Fear is also a big element. (All the what ifs, hesitation and uncertainty. Are all part of fear, not to mention, THE true fear that comes when you face life or death situations.)
(as for myself, I find that kind of fear, normally happens after the conflict. But that's just my experience.)

Granted these are all advanced methods of training, and should not be even look that until a certain basic skill has been achieved.
But if you are looking at reality. You must first ask yourself what is real. And then go from there.
C.A.G.
P.S.
one more thing to look at. In looking at reality, the trick of survival, is to Survive. Persevere, and Cary on!
Just something that Uncle Sam tought me! ;)
C.A.G.

[Ryu]

Hi and welcome to the forum.

There's so many good posts here, I don't know where to begin.

I can say that I also practice my martial art with a MMA flavor, and I also invest time and training into things like fight or flight syndrome, de-escalation stances and semantics, first strike principles, escape route awareness, etc. The difference in self-defense and fighting (as was said before by KC) is that the above things mentioned relate more to mental focus, and street awareness then physical skill. However, when that mental focus must be brought up a notch to include physical skill, the skill must be athletic, honed, and used often on resisting opponents.
I liked your post very much. Good luck to you.

As far as the Traditional vs. MMA stuff........ well I will say only this.
I've learned that there are "traditional" martial artists who train with resisting opponents, spar often, and train athletically. So there is no real doubt in my mind that these "traditional" stylists can fight. I know that MMA people train with resisting opponents, spar often, and train athletically, and they also can fight.

The secrets in martial arts deal with training methods.
I honestly believe that.

Ryu

[rogue]

Good topic CLG,
BTW here's the site that we've been referring to,
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com

Check it out as it'll help explain what the we're talking about.

"I do agree with the fact that you should run the first chance you get. Many times you just don't have an option... "

Can you elaborate?

[dre]

Here we go again.

Wait a sec guys! If I mix Fencing + Kendo = Ultimate weapons style!!!!!

*vomit*

[CLG]

Curtis,
You bring up a very good point. 'Emotional Content' and fear reactivity is definitely important. I believe I brought some of this up in an earlier post.
Role-playing (we use the term micro-fights) is also helpful in re-creating an attack.


Ryu,
Thanks for the welcome. I agree whole-heartedly that the most important thing in MA is in it's training methods, whether it's a TMA or Eclectic.


Rogue,
Thanks for the link! Very interesting site. I read almost everyting on this site last night. :D I've read some of the "Animal's" material before and found it to be pretty eye-opening and in line with much of what I have experienced myself. I would say the same for Peyton Quinn and Tony Blauer's materials.

In terms of th statement: "I do agree with the fact that you should run the first chance you get. Many times you just don't have an option... ", I guess this is a biased statement on my part based on my experience as a bouncer. Although you try to avoid a confrontation at all cost, sometimes you may not have a choice. Of course there are legalities involved, and as a bouncer you have to be sensitive to this issue. In terms of a self-defense I couldn't elaborate too much, most of my experiences is from bouncing and bartending.

CLG

[BeiKongHui]

UK cops copy Matrix self-defence moves


British police officers are being trained in a form of self-defence spectacularly employed by the star Keanu Reeves in hit action movie The Matrix, it was revealed.

The Canadian developer of the Spontaneous Protection Enabling Accelerated Response (SPEAR) course will later this month arrive in Britain to teach the unique skills to officers from 22 forces.

Tony Blauer's technique inspired some of the astonishing action seen in the Hollywood's 1999 science fiction blockbuster.

This week's Police Review magazine said officers attending the course hosted by Warwickshire Constabulary will learn how to manage the psychological and physical effects of fear.

They will be taught how to turn defensive reactions - such as the urge to cover their eyes, face or other vital organs - into an "open-handed blow" to their assailant.


Police Constable Simon Rogers of Warwickshire's firearms operations and training department told the magazine: "We do the Matrix Drill. You know the bit where Keanu Reeves stands still and just moves his body as the bullets fly past him?

"This is what we teach officers to do - to dodge and move and to keep their feet still."

Two sequels to The Matrix, which also starred Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss and Hugo Weaving, are due to be released next year.

©AAP 2002
__________________________________________________ __
(from http://www.tonyblauer.com/About/mission.html)

Our S.P.E.A.R. SYSTEM ™ is the first genetically inspired self-defense system. It is the only self-defense method that fully integrates the body's reflexive responses and instinctive survival mechanisms making the S.P.E.A.R. ™ the easiest, most natural way to protect yourself. Discover a system without boundaries, where all your protective movements are triggered by your opponent's aggression.
Since 1979

B.L.A.U.E.R Tactical Systems has researched one thing:

FIGHTS - How they start and how they end.
__________________________________________________ __
So where might one find these research materials and what are the scientific credentials of those who try to claim they've discovered some sort of behavioral "secret" to fighting? Anyone can claim to research a subject but unfortunately general observations in your school or of your students and training partners will never take the place of actual experimentation by trained psychologists, sociologists, physiologists, geneticists, etc. If someone claims to teach a "scientific" system shouldn't they be able to show the "science"?

[apoweyn]

i had always suspected that 'yuen woo ping' was really just chinese for 'tony blauer.'


stuart b.

[CLG]

BeiKongHui,
I agree with what you're saying. Many of the systems out there claim to be scientific. Whether it's just a marketing ploy or based on actual scientific research is definitely questionable. Why don't you ask Tony Blauer? I've heard he answers all emails direct to him...

All I know is that the tools he offers seem to be quite effective. You will never be able to re-create the real thing, but you can try to get it as close as you can. I think this is what many of these self-prevention experts are speaking of.... In any event, it works for what my instructor is trying to achieve.


Apoweyn,
LOL :D

[rogue]

I think Systema had those moves first.

CLG, It would be hard to run if you're a bouncer. :) Since you used the term self defense I wasn't thinking in terms of a bouncer since what they do I wouldn't consider self defense. Bouncers, security and bodyguards have chosen to put themselves in possible confrontation with others as opposed to a person walking home from the stores having a confrontation thrust upon them. Different mindset and skill set for each.

[No_Know]

"Now (several years later), I understand why my blows and techniques didn’t work. I had practiced pulling my punches for so long that my power, distance and timing were completely off."


So make the adjustments that make the tools you've got work. You would have to be closer than you trained your mindset but if you hit before you pull back you would have more power to your punches.

"One of the things that you will find in a self-defense situation is that there is no time for fixed stances and positions, and certainly no time to execute the technique or drill you’ve worked on for so many years… fights just aren’t static… or patterned."


Fights Are patterened. That's why and where the BJJers and MMAers get what they do. Based on the likely things that would be in an actual fight~. Kung-Fu forms seem to tend to contain several fight situations. You don't seem to have a comprehension of use the right tool for the right job.~ People will listen to you. And if they don't know better, they would believe what you say. But you seem to be comming from disgruntled. And thinking that what you learned was no good. And not that your understanding of the good stuff you picked-up was poor. Or that you just didn't realize how to make it work.


"As I mentioned previously, that NHB is a sport, well, you’re right. BUT, these guys already have the delivery systems in place. They already know how to trade blows, get inside to the clinch, grapple and submit if they have to. And it’s all done in an ‘alive’ manner. All they have to do is “add dirt” as I read on another website a while back."


But these people and you, if that's what you went into, seem suceptable topredictability of attack. And if I think about your range of attacks, I can get around, under or through them With enough Right thinking. The patterns in Kung-Fu can be complex. But one is supposed to learn them as one goes. This allows one to comprehend the likely patters of attack and their counters and the counters to the counters...Sometimes the counterattacks are done as a set-up or distraction. Yet if they don't fall for it or defen it is to be made the primary actual attack.
perhaps, some might say.

[greendragon]

CLG.... of course the wrestler wins, one on one is all about grappling. punching and kicking is for multiple attackers. To fight implies struggle. Strike with authority and intent.

[Dale Dugas]

Great posts fellow trainees of MA.

Intent and mental attributes are some things that many people are afraid to deal with or blatantly ignore within the training of most martial arts schools.

Are you really going to stick your finger in some guys eyes and pull them out? Well, if it was that or be killed or have someone in your family eat a bullet or knife, I say pull em out and play dice with them.

But then I was always known for being a hardass about such.

Anyone train intent in their training?

In Boston,

Dale Dugas

[chingei]

Originally posted by Dale Dugas
But then I was always known for being a hardass about such.



:rolleyes:

[Unmatchable]

Well let me tell you something. Hardly anybody has the time, energy, and financial resources to study more than one or two martial arts at once. Especially if they are hardcore more than once a week for an hour classes. That's why most people only study one art.

As for the initial starter of this post. You lost because you're skills were inadequete. And he was the better man at that time. Anyone can win on any given time. It is not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog. Plus a martial art only gives you what you put into it.