Sport competition and self defense environments...

[Grumblegeezer]

On another thread there was a post noting the difference between the more limited physical training required for self-defense application and what was necessary to succeed in sport competition. YouKnowWho responded with the post below:


I don't think one should separate "self-defense" from "combat sport". Your fist will meet your opponent's face exactly the same way in both environments.

The "combat sport" environment is used to "test" your "self-defense" skill.

On one hand, I definitely see his point. There's no reason to think that less will be demanded of you when fighting for your life in a self-defense situation than in sport competition. If you can't knock down an opponent in a ring, what makes you think it'll be easier in a back ally? If you want to be good at self defense, I agree that you need some sparring to realize what you have to be able to dish out, and what you need to be able to take in a fight.

On the other hand, self-defense is never a "fair fight" between equals. You use whatever deception and dirty tricks you can. For example, I remember a seminar given by a old boxing/fma instructor I've known for years. During one demo segment, he told the young, fit BJJ instructor at his gym to attack him full on. "Tai", the BJJ guy, obliged by taking the FMA guy to the mat, mounting him, and proceeding with the old "ground and pound".

The FMA guy (on the bottom) tapped out with his left hand, and asked everybody watching to give their opinion as to who would walk away from this encounter. We all said "Tai", the guy on top, of course. Then the FMA guy he asked Tai to open his gi top. Inside was the FMA guy's right hand with a metal training knife that he had been working across Tai's gut and chest.. Tai's eyes bugged out in surprise. "I never even knew that was there" he blurted. "If this had been for real, I'd be like ...so dead."

This is the difference between self defense and sport. In self defense, it is assumed that the other guy is bigger, stronger, or better than you are, so you have to find other ways to win.

...Maybe that means you don't slam your fist against "your opponent's face exactly the same way in both environments." Maybe in self-defense, you do something like feign submission and hit 'em with a brick ...then run away.

[YouKnowWho]

Only a skill that has been tested successfully many times is your real skill. Any skill that has not been tested is a skill that you think it may work but whether it will work or not, you truly don't know.

IMO, you have to "test" your

- punching skill in boxing environment,
- kicking/punching skill in kickboxing/MT environment,
- throwing skill in SC/Judo/wrestling environment,
- ground skill in BJJ environment,
- short weapon skill in short weapon combat environment,
- long weapon skill in long weapon combat environment,
- kicking/punching/throwing integration skill in Sanda/Sanshou environment,
- kicking/punching/throwing/locking/ground skill in MMA environment.

You then have to "simulate" your "street self-defense" testing environment by adding plastic knife, rubber brick, multiple opponent's, ...

The term "combat sport" can be extended into whatever that you want to "test" your skill for. It has no limitation. The important thing is to "test" your skill against someone who does fight back. If you can "simulate" a "safe" environment to "test" your skill, that's "combat sport".

Let's take the throwing skill "combat sport" for example. You can make it as simple as "Whoever can get the head lock on the other will win that round". The whole "combat sport" is used to "test" your "head lock" skill and nothing else. This way you can truly concentrate on just one technique. After you have fully test it, you can then change your "combat sport" rule to test other skills.

[LaRoux]

On the other hand, self-defense is never a "fair fight" between equals. You use whatever deception and dirty tricks you can. For example, I remember a seminar given by a old boxing/fma instructor I've known for years. During one demo segment, he told the young, fit BJJ instructor at his gym to attack him full on. "Tai", the BJJ guy, obliged by taking the FMA guy to the mat, mounting him, and proceeding with the old "ground and pound".

The FMA guy (on the bottom) tapped out with his left hand, and asked everybody watching to give their opinion as to who would walk away from this encounter. We all said "Tai", the guy on top, of course. Then the FMA guy he asked Tai to open his gi top. Inside was the FMA guy's right hand with a metal training knife that he had been working across Tai's gut and chest.. Tai's eyes bugged out in surprise. "I never even knew that was there" he blurted. "If this had been for real, I'd be like ...so dead."

This is the difference between self defense and sport. In self defense, it is assumed that the other guy is bigger, stronger, or better than you are, so you have to find other ways to win.

...Maybe that means you don't slam your fist against "your opponent's face exactly the same way in both environments." Maybe in self-defense, you do something like feign submission and hit 'em with a brick ...then run away.

If you want to train self-defense, you train just like the sports guys do. The only difference is that you incorporate your self defense training into it using pretty much the same methods the sports guys do.

As far as realistic self-defense training, I have a feeling that the FMA instructor was pretty clueless himself if that was the extent of his story.

[Kellen Bassette]

It can be tough to train realistically for 'da streetz' because you never can account for all possible variables, but I believe the most realistic, best way to prepare for a real life self defense situation is with combat sports training. Like YKW was saying, you don't have a technique if it hasn't been tested, you just hope you have one.

Also agree about weapons, multiple opponents and such. This is a difficult thing to train realistically, but you got to be creative and find a way to train relatively safely, with true non-compliance. It's just so few and far between to find guys that actually train realistic weapon/multiple opponent defense. There is such a tendency to go into heavy compliance mode with your partner in that sort of drilling; and I think training that way may be worse than not training for the situation at all.

[Grumblegeezer]

First, to YouKnowWho, thanks for stepping up and clearly articulating your position so that this discussion can continue.


As far as realistic self-defense training, I have a feeling that the FMA instructor was pretty clueless himself if that was the extent of his story.


Sorry, LaRoux, I don't see what was so clueless here. This guy has been doing boxing, grappling and FMA for decades. He even trained a bit of WC with me back in the early 80s just to check it out. Now in his fifties, he trains others, and his fighters have done pretty well around here in competition.

As far as the demo --he asked his partner Tai to take him down to make a point, ...that you don't know what the other guy has ...or will do. I (and everybody else) thought he made that point pretty well. Maybe I didn't describe it properly. If so I apologize.

[LaRoux]

Sorry, LaRoux, I don't see what was so clueless here. This guy has been doing boxing, grappling and FMA for decades. He even trained a bit of WC with me back in the early 80s just to check it out. Now in his fifties, he trains others, and his fighters have done pretty well around here in competition.

As far as the demo --he asked his partner to tie him down to make a point. That you don't know what the other guy has. I (and everybody else) thought he made that point pretty well. Maybe I didn't describe it properly. If so I apologize.

So, what was his follow-up training after his demo?

[Grumblegeezer]

Whoops, I got called away in the middle of posting this. Happens a lot. Still haven't found a reliable defense against the wife on the warpath with a huge "Honey-do list" on a Saturday afternoon.

Anyway, I frankly don't remember the instructional context. It was at a seminar that provided a sampling of the several arts taught at that gym, and the general thrust promoted cross-training, and testing your skills against resisting partners to develop a well rounded set of skills. All pretty common-sense and straight forward. That one piece kinda stuck out though, and I thought of it since it seemed related to the theme of this thread.

[LaRoux]

Anyway, I frankly don't remember the instructional context. It was at a seminar that provided a sampling of the several arts taught at that gym, and the general thrust promoted cross-training, and testing your skills against resisting partners to develop a well rounded set of skills. All pretty common-sense and straight forward. That one piece kinda stuck out though, and I thought of it since it seemed related to the theme of this thread.

Seems kind of strange that the gym was promoting a seminar on cross training in their systems and going against resisting partners, yet this was the first time those two instructors from that gym had cross trained with each other with resistance.

Something doesn't quite add up with this story.

[Grumblegeezer]

There is such a tendency to go into heavy compliance mode with your partner in that sort of drilling; and I think training that way may be worse than not training for the situation at all.

Very true. In our VT group we begin training techniques with a lot of compliance until the skill set is somewhat developed. Then we increase the resistance. The problem is that too often members of the same club or class don't really know how to offer meaningful resistance. Take some of the grappling defenses taught. They have to be really tested against guys who know what they are doing, not against another chunner "playing the role of wrestler"...or "boxer", or whatever. That's how some of the garbage we see gets spread around.

In short, I think it's in the student's best interest to get outside of his clique and test his stuff. 'Cause a lot of things won't work ...at least the way they are traditionally taught.

Weapons present a different set of problems. And where I live the most common weapn is a handgun. You don't need a permit to carry (open or concealed) here and an awful lot of folks carry. I've even been to martial arts classes were both students and instructors carry under their sweats. Some of them anyway. You'd throw a low shot to the side and hit something hard. Your partner would reply, "Sorry dude, that's my piece." Really! It's a strange world.

[sihing]

Only a skill that has been tested successfully many times is your real skill. Any skill that has not been tested is a skill that you think it may work but whether it will work or not, you truly don't know.

IMO, you have to "test" your

- punching skill in boxing environment,
- kicking/punching skill in kickboxing/MT environment,
- throwing skill in SC/Judo/wrestling environment,
- ground skill in BJJ environment,
- short weapon skill in short weapon combat environment,
- long weapon skill in long weapon combat environment,
- kicking/punching/throwing integration skill in Sanda/Sanshou environment,
- kicking/punching/throwing/locking/ground skill in MMA environment.

You then have to "simulate" your "street self-defense" testing environment by adding plastic knife, rubber brick, multiple opponent's, ...

The term "combat sport" can be extended into whatever that you want to "test" your skill for. It has no limitation. The important thing is to "test" your skill against someone who does fight back. If you can "simulate" a "safe" environment to "test" your skill, that's "combat sport".

Let's take the throwing skill "combat sport" for example. You can make it as simple as "Whoever can get the head lock on the other will win that round". The whole "combat sport" is used to "test" your "head lock" skill and nothing else. This way you can truly concentrate on just one technique. After you have fully test it, you can then change your "combat sport" rule to test other skills.

Nothing is ever guaranteed in fighting or SD, you can test to the max and still not win, just watch any UFC/Boxing match where they follow the fighter in their training, someone has to lose...But if you don't train you learn nothing, and the more you train and test the better "YOU" will get, but the Variable is the "OTHER",,,it's always your skill vs. his skills, who knows who wins until it is done...You do the best you can with what you want to do with it..Individual Intent is key, obviously someone with more intent in regard to their skills will do more with it and on paper be more effective,, We all don't have the same Intent, so therefore the effectiveness is different, but saying all that anyone can lose on any given day:)

J

[LaRoux]

Nothing is ever guaranteed in fighting or SD, you can test to the max and still not win, just watch any UFC/Boxing match where they follow the fighter in their training, someone has to lose...But if you don't train you learn nothing, and the more you train and test the better "YOU" will get, but the Variable is the "OTHER",,,it's always your skill vs. his skills, who knows who wins until it is done...You do the best you can with what you want to do with it..Individual Intent is key, obviously someone with more intent in regard to their skills will do more with it and on paper be more effective,, We all don't have the same Intent, so therefore the effectiveness is different, but saying all that anyone can lose on any given day:)

J

Which kind of negates your theory that effective self-defense is easy to learn and apply.

[sihing]

On another thread there was a post noting the difference between the more limited physical training required for self-defense application and what was necessary to succeed in sport competition. YouKnowWho responded with the post below:



On one hand, I definitely see his point. There's no reason to think that less will be demanded of you when fighting for your life in a self-defense situation than in sport competition. If you can't knock down an opponent in a ring, what makes you think it'll be easier in a back ally? If you want to be good at self defense, I agree that you need some sparring to realize what you have to be able to dish out, and what you need to be able to take in a fight.

On the other hand, self-defense is never a "fair fight" between equals. You use whatever deception and dirty tricks you can. For example, I remember a seminar given by a old boxing/fma instructor I've known for years. During one demo segment, he told the young, fit BJJ instructor at his gym to attack him full on. "Tai", the BJJ guy, obliged by taking the FMA guy to the mat, mounting him, and proceeding with the old "ground and pound".

The FMA guy (on the bottom) tapped out with his left hand, and asked everybody watching to give their opinion as to who would walk away from this encounter. We all said "Tai", the guy on top, of course. Then the FMA guy he asked Tai to open his gi top. Inside was the FMA guy's right hand with a metal training knife that he had been working across Tai's gut and chest.. Tai's eyes bugged out in surprise. "I never even knew that was there" he blurted. "If this had been for real, I'd be like ...so dead."

This is the difference between self defense and sport. In self defense, it is assumed that the other guy is bigger, stronger, or better than you are, so you have to find other ways to win.

...Maybe that means you don't slam your fist against "your opponent's face exactly the same way in both environments." Maybe in self-defense, you do something like feign submission and hit 'em with a brick ...then run away.

Nice post, and nice example:) SD is different in so many ways, so many more variables to deal with,,,that does not mean a SD person is more effective in SD than a sport person... Human Beings are very versatile, and can function in so many different ways, there are no guarantee's with this stuff,,you just do the best you can with what you have and Intent..

J

[Grumblegeezer]

Seems kind of strange that the gym was promoting a seminar on cross training in their systems and going against resisting partners, yet this was the first time those two instructors from that gym had cross trained with each other with resistance.

Something doesn't quite add up with this story.

No, the head guy planned it and asked on of his assistant to help him demonstrate. Whether or not the assistant actually knew what was going to happen ahead of time or not I really don't know, and is irrelevant to the point of the thread. I was just trying to illustrate a point. Can we move on now?

[LaRoux]

No, the head guy planned it and asked on of his assistant to help him demonstrate. Whether or not the assistant actually knew what was going to happen ahead of time or not I really don't know, and is irrelevant to the point of the thread. I was just trying to illustrate a point. Can we move on now?

The assistant knowing or not knowing is totally relevant. If he knew in advance (which he most likely would have if he was his assistant), then the whole thing was just play acting and had not very much to do with demonstrating what really happens in a SD situation.

[sihing]

Which kind of negates your theory that effective self-defense is easy to learn and apply.

I never said SD was Easy to learn or apply, you've misunderstood or misquoted..

It takes work and dedication, but can be done in short amounts of time, I've experienced it, so who's to say it isn't true for me?

My experience is only a story for you, and visa versa..

What I am talking about is Development of basic tools, not application, one can develop what they need to know and do in SD situations quickly, to apply it successfully is the variable, and is dependant on many variables,,, so in other words no one knows if it will work successfully vs someone attacking full force until it happens for them..but learning/developing something in the area of SD will have some effect on how they are able to handle it vs. nothing at all...

J

[LaRoux]

I never said SD was Easy to learn or apply, you've misunderstood or misquoted..

It takes work and dedication, but can be done in short amounts of time, I've experienced it, so who's to say it isn't true for me?

My experience is only a story for you, and visa versa..

J

Easy or short... either way is still invalid for anyone.

[LaRoux]

What I am talking about is Development of basic tools, not application, one can develop what they need to know and do in SD situations quickly, to apply it successfully is the variable, and is dependant on many variables,,, so in other words no one knows if it will work successfully vs someone attacking full force until it happens for them..but learning/developing something in the area of SD will have some effect on how they are able to handle it vs. nothing at all...

J

You can develop basic sport fighting tools (not application) quickly also. Just as with self-defense tools, the basic/quick version won't get you very far, though.

[Subitai]

This topic again?

I'm surprised nobody has used the cliche' "the 90's called to want it's topic back"

Or the Oldie but goodie; " A BJJ guy or insert any grappler (here) could also gut you like a fish with a knife...that doesn't take any sort of special training"

Mabe best of them all, "Opinions are like a-holes we all have them".


I often speak the difference between them both and like the a-hole that I can be...I have my own opinions just like you guys.


Sport and SD...are not the same. Both can give you training and discipline blah blah ect. But never in my experiences were they even close to eachother.

This is especially true of the Mindset for each case... Mental game or lack of it is a huge deal. But it makes all the difference in the world.

** At this point if you disagree with me...i'm cool with that.

But so I can't be labeled a Troll, i'll at least state a couple of my reasons why:

In any of my street fights, I never had the chance to really prepare...at least not in the way I did when I was getting paid to prepare for a fight.

I never got to watch videos of my opponent and study his previous fights.

I never asked the dude if he had a physical or was he HIV negative.

My thoughts in a few fights were, " Holy SH!T somebodies really going to get hurt here man...this is NO JOKE"

I never thought or worried about that in the ring. I could take risks and concentrate on just trying to win. There were no other factors distracting me...like where are my friends and how i'm going to get home or outta this mess. Or where's my car, the nearest exit...sh!t like that.

Fact is...you don't even move the same in a real world environment, You could be drunk or overly lucid and acutely aware of your surroundings but almost to a fault. You have no thoughts of conserving Gas or what is the Referee going to do.

Worst of all, if it's just YOU and HIM, mano a mano and nobody is around and no cameras... You can get the "I'm going to f*&k-ing Kill you" possessing your thoughts and that's when people get killed. Mabe not immediately, but I come back on your a$$ when you're knocked out and finish you.

Mindset baby, it affects the physical and no they are not the same.

2 bits, "O"

[LaRoux]

Sport and SD...are not the same. Both can give you training and discipline blah blah ect. But never in my experiences were they even close to eachother.

They are both the same, as well as different.

They are different in that sport is a more controlled environment with rules and some beforehand knowledge.


They are the same in that effective training for each follows most of the same principles.

[sihing]

You can develop basic sport fighting tools (not application) quickly also. Just as with self-defense tools, the basic/quick version won't get you very far, though.

You make huge assumptions...how do you know how far someone's training/intent/abilities will go, you can tell the future?? lol..

To say it simply, training in something is better than training in nothing in my book, but no one know's the outcome or effectiveness of the training until the SD encounter happens. That's it.. You, nor anyone here can state any different or no the future of an encounter that hasn't happened yet. All one can do is prepare to the best of their abilities, and that my friend is up to the individual to determine, not you or I.

J

[sihing]

This topic again?

I'm surprised nobody has used the cliche' "the 90's called to want it's topic back"

Or the Oldie but goodie; " A BJJ guy or insert any grappler (here) could also gut you like a fish with a knife...that doesn't take any sort of special training"

Mabe best of them all, "Opinions are like a-holes we all have them".


I often speak the difference between them both and like the a-hole that I can be...I have my own opinions just like you guys.


Sport and SD...are not the same. Both can give you training and discipline blah blah ect. But never in my experiences were they even close to eachother.

This is especially true of the Mindset for each case... Mental game or lack of it is a huge deal. But it makes all the difference in the world.

** At this point if you disagree with me...i'm cool with that.

But so I can't be labeled a Troll, i'll at least state a couple of my reasons why:

In any of my street fights, I never had the chance to really prepare...at least not in the way I did when I was getting paid to prepare for a fight.

I never got to watch videos of my opponent and study his previous fights.

I never asked the dude if he had a physical or was he HIV negative.

My thoughts in a few fights were, " Holy SH!T somebodies really going to get hurt here man...this is NO JOKE"

I never thought or worried about that in the ring. I could take risks and concentrate on just trying to win. There were no other factors distracting me...like where are my friends and how i'm going to get home or outta this mess. Or where's my car, the nearest exit...sh!t like that.

Fact is...you don't even move the same in a real world environment, You could be drunk or overly lucid and acutely aware of your surroundings but almost to a fault. You have no thoughts of conserving Gas or what is the Referee going to do.

Worst of all, if it's just YOU and HIM, mano a mano and nobody is around and no cameras... You can get the "I'm going to f*&k-ing Kill you" possessing your thoughts and that's when people get killed. Mabe not immediately, but I come back on your a$$ when you're knocked out and finish you.

Mindset baby, it affects the physical and no they are not the same.

2 bits, "O"

Excellent post, my experience exactly...:)

J

[LaRoux]

Worst of all, if it's just YOU and HIM, mano a mano and nobody is around and no cameras... You can get the "I'm going to f*&k-ing Kill you" possessing your thoughts and that's when people get killed. Mabe not immediately, but I come back on your a$$ when you're knocked out and finish you.

Spoken like someone with very little self-defense experience or knowledge.

[LaRoux]

Excellent post, my experience exactly...:)

J

Which kind of proves my point about your lack of knowledge in this area.

[Grumblegeezer]

This topic again? ....

Yeah, it is a bit old... but anyway, could you elaborate a bit on what you said below? I'm not sure I got what you were getting at. Loss of self control? You wanting to kill the other guy when he's knocked out?

One guy I know who has more "street experience" than I would ever want to have says you you've got to have that mind set, but keep it on a leash. Like a big, bad dog.


Worst of all, if it's just YOU and HIM, mano a mano and nobody is around and no cameras... You can get the "I'm going to f*&k-ing Kill you" possessing your thoughts and that's when people get killed. Mabe not immediately, but I come back on your a$$ when you're knocked out and finish you.

[sihing]

Which kind of proves my point about your lack of knowledge in this area.

Lol, you make me laugh man:) Such as poignant statement with no knowledge to back it up..

You could be absolutely right or absolutely wrong, you'll never know bud:)

James

[Subitai]

Yeah, it is a bit old... but anyway, could you elaborate a bit on what you said below? I'm not sure I got what you were getting at. Loss of self control? You wanting to kill the other guy when he's knocked out?

One guy I know who has more "street experience" than I would ever want to have says you you've got to have that mind set, but keep it on a leash. Like a big, bad dog.


I'm not saying you have to be a bad a$$ or be brave...heck everyone's afraid at some point. I'm just expressing my opinion on this


I would agree with your friend, it's just that we all have different ideas on self control.
If a person has never been a such a bad street fight that they were never once thinking "I'm going to kill this guy". God bless them because at least they don't have that memory.
The rage, that ensues is terrible and you'd be a complete a-hole if you didn't at least worry or "Check" yourself later after the adrenaline has worn down.

Dude seriously, you've never seen 2 guys throwing down so hard that they are almost in tears because they wanna kill eachother?


about the finishing thing.
Every neighborhood has it's own expression, for example: to mud-foot someone or "muddfooting" a guy is just like it sounds. Awful.

[YouKnowWho]

Very true. In our VT group we begin training techniques with a lot of compliance until the skill set is somewhat developed. Then we increase the resistance. The problem is that too often members of the same club or class don't really know how to offer meaningful resistance.

You have to use compliance component to develop your "solo skill". You then use non-compliance opponent to develop your "combo skill".

For example,

in order to develop your "foot sweep" skill, your opponent has to put weight on his leading leg on purpose (compliance). After you have swept your opponent down 1000 times, you will build your confidence on your foot sweep. After that, your opponent tries not to put weight on his leading leg (non-compliance), you will soon find out that your foot sweep won't work any more.

You then try to figure out how to:

- force your opponent to put weight on his leading leg. You start to use another move to set up your foot sweep.
- use your foot sweep as fake and set up your next move.

Now, you have just moved from your "solo skill" development stage into your "set up" development stage and "combo skill" development stage.

[Sean66]

Sport competition is a test of skill in a controlled environment.
It's a great thing, and training for competition fighting can help us to develop many attributes that may help us in a self-defense situation.

However, as many experts on the subject point out, an assault is not a test of skill. The last thing that a criminal assailant wants is a "fight". He wants nothing but a victim, and he will choose his victim, as well as the time and place of the assault, to tip the scales as much in his favor as possible, minimizing risk and maximizing results.

Your "goal" as a victim of assault is not to demonstrate your dominance through superior skill, but rather to escape without injury.

As Rory Miller points out in his book, Meditations on Violence, a criminal assault happens much closer, faster, suddenly and powerfully than most people believe. It is nasty, brutish and short and has nothing to do with the intricate chess game of timing and distance involved in competition fighting.

So, if you are training for self-defense, your training has to take the nature of criminal violence into account. Regular sparring, even at full contact, is not enough.

You have to "contextualize" your skill, putting it under pressure in situations that replicate actual assault scenarios as closely as possible. Since you still have to take safety into account, there will be flaws in this type of training as well, and you have to understand them and work with them.

I really suggest reading Miller's books. They are full of great insights, written by someone who has a very intimate knowledge of criminals and criminal violence.

[guy b.]

Good post Sean.
Thanks for the heads up on Rory Miller.

Agree, good post. It is incredibly naive to imagine that a criminal assault is going to resemble a ring fight in any way.

[sihing]

Yes, good post Sean.

A SD situation has many variables present that the competition arena does not, they share the same tools and such, but are different in intention and environment as mentioned in the previous posts. Believe this or not it is the reality..

Awareness is key in SD situations, and one can achieve effectivenss in SD situations quickly and be able to survive to live another day if that is what they want. Training for comps is about competition and winning, that is different as you are preparing to fight someone that is prepared as well, under ruled conditions. SD situations are totally different, your only intent is to survive, not beat and, where is it going to happen, whom is involved, what are the circumstances, are you impaired and are they??? The variables add up, and the intent and intensity are so much different.

VT is all about the physical side of it, allowing one to learn effective mechanics and back up structure, sensitivity, control and power generation to make it all happen once a SD situation takes place, its not meant for comps IMO, it can be adapted for it though..

J

[YouKnowWho]

If we don't talk about multiple opponents, gun, knife, stick, brick, ... and just talk about 1 on 1 open hand fight, the street fight situation may add more "surprise" factor into it. But most of the time, your street opponent won't be as good fighter as the guy you may meet in the ring.

In order to be able to deal with "surprise", you have to train your body to respond to certain situation sub-consciously without thinking. What's the most common attack on the street? It won't be a

- roundhouse kick to your head,
- side kick to your chest,
- shoot at your single leg or double legs,
- perfect hip throw,
- ...

It will be someone tries to knock your head off with a jab, cross type of punches. What will be your respond?

You can train yourself to respond without thinking by

- kick your leg out at your opponent's belly,
- sweep at your opponent's leading leg,
- spin your body and throw a 45 degree downward haymaker,
- ...

All those responds can be used to interrupt your opponent's attack nicely. After you have taken care of the "surprise" factor, you can then decide what you want to do next. After that, if you decide to jump in and attack your opponent, your attack will be exactly the same as your attack in the ring.

All those sub-conscious responds, and your jump in attack can be trained in the "combat sport" environment.

[sihing]

If we don't talk about gun, knife, stick, brick, ... and just talk about open hand fight, the street fight situation may add more "surprise" factor into it. But most of the time, your street opponent won't be as good fighter as the guy you may meet in the ring.

In order to be able to deal with "surprise", you have to train your body to respond to certain situation sub-consciously without thinking. What's the most common attack on the street? It won't be a

- roundhouse kick to your head,
- side kick to your chest,
- shoot at your single leg or double legs,
- perfect hip throw,
- ...

It will be someone tries to knock your head off with a jab, cross type of combination. What will be your respond?

You can train yourself to respond without thinking by

- kicking your leg out at your opponent's belly,
- sweep at your opponent's leading leg,
- spin your body and throw a 45 degree downward haymaker,
- ...

Your respond try to interrupt your opponent's attack. After you have taken care of the "surprise" factor, you can then decide what you want to do after that. All those sub-conscious responds can be trained in the "combat sport" environment.


Now u''ve created a false envirnment, "oh just imagine there are no weapons" then its just like the ring, the very fact there could b weapons or multi opponents changes everything, but u have made the what if change to make it like a ring fight, how convenient..

[YouKnowWho]

Now u''ve created a false envirnment, "oh just imagine there are no weapons" then its just like the ring, the very fact there could b weapons or multi opponents changes everything, but u have made the what if change to make it like a ring fight, how convenient..

I don't know there will be much to talk about if you have "Colt 45" in your hand and I have "Walter PPK" in my hand. Your MA style and my MA style won't mean anything.

One of the best TCMA fighters used to say,

- "If you 2 don't have knifes and I don't have knife, I'll win."
- "If you 2 have knifes and I also have knife, I'll win."

He would never say,

- "If you 3 don't have knifes and I don't have knife, I'll win."
- "If you 3 have knifes and I also have knife, I'll win."
- "If you 2 have knifes and I don't have knife, I'll win."

When multiple opponents and knifes are involved, even the best TCMA fighter won't even know what the outcome may be. How can normal guys like you and I be able to make any assumption in such situation?

[LaRoux]

As Rory Miller points out in his book, Meditations on Violence, a criminal assault happens much closer, faster, suddenly and powerfully than most people believe. It is nasty, brutish and short and has nothing to do with the intricate chess game of timing and distance involved in competition fighting.

Really? Tell that to this guy:
http://vimeo.com/5479996

There seemed to be quite a bit of timing an distance involved there.

[LaRoux]

You have to "contextualize" your skill, putting it under pressure in situations that replicate actual assault scenarios as closely as possible. Since you still have to take safety into account, there will be flaws in this type of training as well, and you have to understand them and work with them.

This part is true. And it's clear that the "training for self-defense crowd" that is posting here has no clue how hard you have to train and how long it takes to develop this kind of skill or how dangerous and injury-provoking this type of training is.

The very nature of the unpredictability and the number of factors involved in SD situations dictate that, if anything, developing this kind of ability to a decent degree is harder than developing sport fighting skills.

[Grumblegeezer]

In reading the previous exchange between YouKnowWho and Sihing, I see validity in both points of view. If you limit the situation to a one-on-one empty handed encounter, as YouKnowWho described, then there are a lot more parallels to combat sport training. And, regardless of the situation, the reflexes, conditioning and physical and mental toughness trained in sporting combat would be tremendously helpful assets in a self-defense situation. Conversely, approaching a self defense scenario with a competitive mindset focused on "winning" over an opponent can be counterproductive as well.

One problem in this discussion is that some people confuse self-defense with "street fighting". "Street fighting" implies no holds barred dueling with the objective of "winning" i.e. defeating your opponent or opponents. On the other hand, in a true self-defense situation, your goal may simply be to escape, that is to get yourself, and possibly loved ones or others you are protecting, out of harm's way while exposing yourself to the least danger possible. In other words, self defense is about survival. "Winning" over an opponent isn't a concern.

[LaRoux]

One problem in this discussion is that some people confuse self-defense with "street fighting". "Street fighting" implies no holds barred dueling with the objective of "winning" i.e. defeating your opponent or opponents. On the other hand, in a true self-defense situation, your goal may simply be to escape, that is to get yourself, and possibly loved ones or others you are protecting, out of harm's way while exposing yourself to the least danger possible. In other words, self defense is about survival. "Winning" over an opponent isn't a concern.

Self-defense incorporates either or both of these or sometimes something else. Sometimes self-defense requires escaping. Sometimes it involves "winning". Sometimes it involves simply surviving for a while until backup comes.

[LaRoux]

VT is all about the physical side of it, allowing one to learn effective mechanics and back up structure, sensitivity, control and power generation to make it all happen once a SD situation takes place, its not meant for comps IMO, it can be adapted for it though..

Not if there is no specific, hard training in those self-defense situations.

[Grumblegeezer]

Self-defense incorporates either or both of these or sometimes something else. Sometimes self-defense requires escaping. Sometimes it involves "winning". Sometimes it involves simply surviving for a while until backup comes.

Well said.

[LaRoux]

If you limit the situation to a one-on-one empty handed encounter, as YouKnowWho described, then there are a lot more parallels to combat sport training. And, regardless of the situation, the reflexes, conditioning and physical and mental toughness trained in sporting combat would be tremendously helpful assets in a self-defense situation.

Add in weapons, different environments, and differing number of opponents and there are still more parallels to sport training than there are differences if one is going to do effective training





Conversely, approaching a self defense scenario with a competitive mindset focused on "winning" over an opponent can be counterproductive as well..

Last time I checked, wanting to disable your opponent as quickly as possible is not counterproductive to a SD situation.

[LaRoux]

However, as many experts on the subject point out, an assault is not a test of skill. The last thing that a criminal assailant wants is a "fight". He wants nothing but a victim, and he will choose his victim, as well as the time and place of the assault, to tip the scales as much in his favor as possible, minimizing risk and maximizing results.

Once again, the "self-defense crowd" seems to want to minimize what can happen in a SD situation. SD can involve this type of person. It can also include many types of situations in which the aggressor doesn't care at all about how he chooses a victim or when or where it happens.

[LaRoux]

Agree, good post. It is incredibly naive to imagine that a criminal assault is going to resemble a ring fight in any way.

What is incredibly naive is to assume that a "criminal assault" will never have similarities to a ring fight.

[LaRoux]

Awareness is key in SD situations, and one can achieve effectivenss in SD situations quickly and be able to survive to live another day if that is what they want. Training for comps is about competition and winning, that is different as you are preparing to fight someone that is prepared as well, under ruled conditions.

Both situations depend on the level of the opponent(s). Sure you can develop some effectiveness for SD quickly. You can do the same in sport. However, as in any human endeavor, developing high levels of skill takes a lot of time and work.

Of course there will always be those hucksters who are selling the "get good/rich/ripped quick (insert whatever shortcut goal applies) scams.




SD situations are totally different, your only intent is to survive, not beat and, where is it going to happen, whom is involved, what are the circumstances, are you impaired and are they??? The variables add up, and the intent and intensity are so much different.

The very nature of the unpredictability and the number of potential factors makes developing skills in this area even harder than sport fighting.

[sihing]

Both situations depend on the level of the opponent(s). Sure you can develop some effectiveness for SD quickly. You can do the same in sport. However, as in any human endeavor, developing high levels of skill takes a lot of time and work.

Of course there will always be those hucksters who are selling the "get good/rich/ripped quick (insert whatever shortcut goal applies) scams.





The very nature of the unpredictability and the number of potential factors makes developing skills in this area even harder than sport fighting.

Not harder than sport fighting, just different in many ways. Both have their difficulties to overcome, both share tools and motions that are similar, but that is just the surface, the intent and situations are different, the danger is different, the environment is different ( I teach ppl to be aware of natural weapons or aids, like stair cases, corners of walls, chairs/tables, glass/liquid on floor), your faculties and his are different (meaning there is no awareness that the event will take place long before it happens, the criminal may decide 10 min bfr he attacks you that this is going to happen), the element of surprise is more present in SD situations (if you trained in it, this element is paramount of importance, it can give you a great advantage, the assailant may not be able to read your SD abilities in you, and if he does then maybe he may not make you his next victim..)

The thing is there are no ABSOLUTES here (U seem to believe there is..), anything can happen, it is just a matter of getting prepared for it as best one can and being aware of surroundings and situations as best one can,,What else can one do??

J

[Sean66]

LaRoux,
The video you posted involves a different type of violence, and hence a different dynamic.
It is not a criminal assault, but a form of social violence.

Miller describes this type of violence as including "ritualized jockeying for territory or status. It also includes acts to prove or increase group solidarity (a powerful side-effect of hunting as a team) and violence to enforce the rules and mores of the group."

Asocial violence, on the other hand, "...does not target the victim as a person, but as a resource. Asocial violence is the domain of the predator and the humanity of his victim does not enter into the equation."

The two have a much different dynamic. Social violence, with it's emphasis on establishing dominance (sexual, racial or otherwise) tends to follow very clear patterns, depending on culture, and also tends more closely to resemble what most people think as "fighting". Miller fittingly refers to it as "the monkey dance".

Asocial violence is what I was referring to in my post (my bad for not being clear), and more resembles this (go to 1:16)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RROfS6tznw

[Grumblegeezer]

LaRoux,
The video you posted involves a different type of violence, and hence a different dynamic.
It is not a criminal assault, but a form of social violence.

Miller describes this type of violence as including "ritualized jockeying for territory or status. It also includes acts to prove or increase group solidarity (a powerful side-effect of hunting as a team) and violence to enforce the rules and mores of the group."

Asocial violence, on the other hand, "...does not target the victim as a person, but as a resource. Asocial violence is the domain of the predator and the humanity of his victim does not enter into the equation."

The two have a much different dynamic.

Sean, thanks for this informative post. It addresses a big part of what I was getting at. Whether the violence you confront is social or asocial, a pure self-defense perspective begins with awareness and avoidance.

If the violence is social in nature, by knowing the rules and refusing to get caught up in the "monkey dance" a potential victim may be able to de-escalate and ultimately avoid being engaged in a violent encounter. Someone who approaches the same situation with a competitive, "gotta win" attitude will fall right into the monkey dance. This is the point some here don't seem to get.

[guy b.]

What is incredibly naive is to assume that a "criminal assault" will never have similarities to a ring fight.

It rarely has much similarity to a ring fight. The person hitting first usually wins. Sparring with rules is a step in preparation but once you have gone through this, working up to no gloves, the most important prep for real street assault is more role playing and acting than physical fighting skill training. It is learning to read situations and build awareness, learning when to act and when to watch, building your memory of similar situations to create situational awareness and promote protective behaviour choice. The final step is of course to put yourself in dangerous situations. Door work is a favourite for this but it can go much further.

[anerlich]

Disregard everything said above (other than the advocacy of Rory Miller) and visit this site:

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/

and read Strong on Defense, by Sanford Strong.

Then read Matt Thornton's "Street vs Sport" essays.

According to the CDC you're several thousand times times more likely to die of lifestyle-related heart disease than from a violent assault, so you might want to consider the relative risks in considering the purposes of your training.

Peace out.

[guy b.]

Disregard everything said above (other than the advocacy of Rory Miller) and visit this site:

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/

The approach advocated by that site appears very similar to that put forward by Sean, myself and others.

[anerlich]

The approach advocated by that site appears very similar to that put forward by Sean, myself and others.

Good to see you jumping on the right bandwagon.

[guy b.]

Good to see you jumping on the right bandwagon.

The bandwagon jumped on me. That site looks decent but pretty standard in SD terms

[GlennR]

The bandwagon jumped on me. That site looks decent but pretty standard in SD terms

Now if only it had PBWSLVT it would be above standard ;)

[guy b.]

Now if only it had PBWSLVT it would be above standard ;)

Really here are a lot of people to go to before PB for reality based self defence training! PB deals with a different thing. If you want SD training go to the experts.

[GlennR]

Really here are a lot of people to go to before PB for reality based self defence training! PB deals with a different thing. If you want SD training go to the experts.

That was a (poor) joke......... if only PBWSLVT taught sarcasm awareness as well!! ;)

[Grumblegeezer]

According to the CDC you're several thousand times times more likely to die of lifestyle-related heart disease than from a violent assault, so you might want to consider the relative risks in considering the purposes of your training.

Anerlich: Good info ...and good job on steering this thread in a positive direction.

One comment about the quote above. Since according to the article on the page you referred us to, most physical violence is personal, involving someone you know... most is not avoidable crime but fighting, with mutual escalation and shared blame. And although death from assault may be rare, fighting is not.

And I might add, that although most such fights with associates, co-workers and even family members may not result in death or severe injury, the life consequences can be really severe ...a career destroyed, family life ruined, lawsuits, criminal charges, jail time and the like. So the old "awareness, avoidance and de-escalation" approach is something to take seriously.

[guy b.]

That was a (poor) joke......... if only PBWSLVT taught sarcasm awareness as well!! ;)

I know it was a joke, I thought answering as if it wasn't was more useful

[GlennR]

I know it was a joke, I thought answering as if it wasn't was more useful

Ahhhhh, no wasted movement hey?

[anerlich]

The bandwagon jumped on me.

Quite the ego there, bub.


That site looks decent but pretty standard in SD terms

Yeah, that's what's good about it, rather than a bunch of WC guys with "deep insights" into RBSD.

[Sean66]

Thanks for the link Anerlich. Excellent stuff.

[guy b.]

Yeah, that's what's good about it, rather than a bunch of WC guys with "deep insights" into RBSD.

It maybe would have helped to read the thread first

[LaRoux]

LaRoux,
The video you posted involves a different type of violence, and hence a different dynamic.
It is not a criminal assault, but a form of social violence.

Miller describes this type of violence as including "ritualized jockeying for territory or status. It also includes acts to prove or increase group solidarity (a powerful side-effect of hunting as a team) and violence to enforce the rules and mores of the group."

Asocial violence, on the other hand, "...does not target the victim as a person, but as a resource. Asocial violence is the domain of the predator and the humanity of his victim does not enter into the equation."

The two have a much different dynamic. Social violence, with it's emphasis on establishing dominance (sexual, racial or otherwise) tends to follow very clear patterns, depending on culture, and also tends more closely to resemble what most people think as "fighting". Miller fittingly refers to it as "the monkey dance".

Asocial violence is what I was referring to in my post (my bad for not being clear), and more resembles this (go to 1:16)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RROfS6tznw

Yeah, walking down the street and having 3 racist guys jump out of their truck to beat you up doesn't count as self-defense because it is social violence rather than asocial violence. :rolleyes:

[LaRoux]

One comment about the quote above. Since according to the article on the page you referred us to, most physical violence is personal, involving someone you know... most is not avoidable crime but [I]fighting, with mutual escalation and shared blame. And although death from assault may be rare, fighting is not..

Sometimes personal violence with someone you know cannot be avoided or deescalated. Just because something is not a surprise assault against someone with a weapon or two does not make it not self-defense.

[Sean66]

LaRoux,
I did not say that it "doesn't count".
It's a different type of violence and has a different dynamic.

I really suggest reading some material on the subject. The books by Rory miller, "Facing Violence" and "Meditations on Violence" would be a good starting point.

[LaRoux]

LaRoux,
I did not say that it "doesn't count".
It's a different type of violence and has a different dynamic.


I understand the difference. Both types count as self-defense. Imagine that.

[Grumblegeezer]

Interestingly, the same kind of status seeking social behaviors that characterize the "monkey dance" can often be observed in posts on this forum, and on this particular thread.

Check out some of the ego driven remarks, the refusals to back down, admit mis-statements, or in any way yield dominance, ...the deliberately contrary attitudes and sarcastic replies ...good thing we are unable to make physical contact or we'd probably witness more than a few silly fights!

On the other hand, it's a good opportunity to practice avoidance and de-escalation. Unlike a rough bar scene, here when people get out of hand ...you just exit the forum.

[LaRoux]

Check out some of the ego driven remarks, the refusals to back down, admit mis-statements, or in any way yield dominance, ...the deliberately contrary attitudes and sarcastic replies ...good thing we are unable to make physical contact or we'd probably witness more than a few silly fights!

No you wouldn't because all the "self-defense" crowd would be too busy exiting the building rather than asserting themselves and risking a physical confrontation that might get them hurt.

[anerlich]

It maybe would have helped to read the thread first

I read it a second time and it was not helpful then either.

[lance]

On another thread there was a post noting the difference between the more limited physical training required for self-defense application and what was necessary to succeed in sport competition. YouKnowWho responded with the post below:



On one hand, I definitely see his point. There's no reason to think that less will be demanded of you when fighting for your life in a self-defense situation than in sport competition. If you can't knock down an opponent in a ring, what makes you think it'll be easier in a back ally? If you want to be good at self defense, I agree that you need some sparring to realize what you have to be able to dish out, and what you need to be able to take in a fight.

On the other hand, self-defense is never a "fair fight" between equals. You use whatever deception and dirty tricks you can. For example, I remember a seminar given by a old boxing/fma instructor I've known for years. During one demo segment, he told the young, fit BJJ instructor at his gym to attack him full on. "Tai", the BJJ guy, obliged by taking the FMA guy to the mat, mounting him, and proceeding with the old "ground and pound".

The FMA guy (on the bottom) tapped out with his left hand, and asked everybody watching to give their opinion as to who would walk away from this encounter. We all said "Tai", the guy on top, of course. Then the FMA guy he asked Tai to open his gi top. Inside was the FMA guy's right hand with a metal training knife that he had been working across Tai's gut and chest.. Tai's eyes bugged out in surprise. "I never even knew that was there" he blurted. "If this had been for real, I'd be like ...so dead."

This is the difference between self defense and sport. In self defense, it is assumed that the other guy is bigger, stronger, or better than you are, so you have to find other ways to win.

...Maybe that means you don't slam your fist against "your opponent's face exactly the same way in both environments." Maybe in self-defense, you do something like feign submission and hit 'em with a brick ...then run away.

Grumblegeezer , when you talk about sports competition ? Are you talking about MMA ? Sports Competition has rules and regulations right ? Self Defense it ' s either your attacker or you . In a sports competition if either you or your opponent severly hurting eachother , can be banned from the competition .

In a self defense situation , weapons can be involved too , it can be dirty and mean too , so we all have to deal with whatever may result out of it . To me if you can knock the opponent out or hurt the person , then that ' s good . Other than that doing anything to avoid the risk of what the opponent may do to us . It works both ways to me . If you can avoid it or get away then that ' s good , but other than that we'll just have to deal with the situation .

[anerlich]

and sarcastic replies

ban those an my raison d'etre on this forum is gone

[Grumblegeezer]

ban those an my raison d'etre on this forum is gone

OK, I grant you that. As long as they are entertaining, why not? Like that one about reading the thread a second time and it not helping.