Even Worse Martial Arts

[Najdorf]

"More correctly Oleg Taktarov practiced sportive Sambo. "

Then he taught Sportive Sambo to Spetznaz, or lied about doing so.

"Give an "average" Spetsnaz a spade and see how quickly he cracks open Renzo Gracie's skull from 25 feet away. "

I sure hope they could win with a weapon. But I have a feeling some of them would manage to blow it. The members of "elite units" that I've taken on have not turned out to be all that great at unarmed.

Gracies lose fights. Japanese Wrestlers lose even more fights. Everyone who keeps fighting eventually loses. There is so much cross training now, that the individual matters more than the art they claim as their own.

I don't think we're actually in disagreement. BJJ by itself is not appropriate for Rangers. Actually in the 90's a lot of them studied Bujinkan Ninjutsu off base (Ft. Benning) with Cris Weakley in Columbus, GA. They would have done well to continue that trend, and crosstrain in other arts including BJJ AND Sambo.

I've met all three of the above (Gracie, Taktarov & Weakley), and all are tough in different ways. Any of them, or their arts, including Sambo, would have a lot to offer the Rangers. Most Rangers will train in several arts as they travel around anyway.

 

[Bahadur]

kungfool:

It's good that you provide low-cost instruction and one with ethnics. That's all very good.

You wrote "I also teach only a measure of 'practical self-defense'.......I am unable to teach much actual grappling but I do teach many standing hapkido techniques."

My question is this: what is your qualification for teaching "self-defense"? That you know Hapkido techniques? The reason I ask that question is not to get "personal" or disrespectful. I rather seek your vision of what source of experience/training should be "required" to teach self-defense.

Too often I see a 25-year old woman with 5-6 years of TKD training (1-3 Dan) with a little bit of Hapkido (or Aikido or Judo) training teaching "self-defense" or "anti-rape" techniques to a bunch of wide-eyed sorority girls and housewives.

Najdorf:

"More correctly Oleg Taktarov practiced sportive Sambo. "

Then he taught Sportive Sambo to Spetznaz, or lied about doing so.

No. What I meant was that he used sportive Sambo techniques in his mixed martial arts contests like the one with Renzo Gracie.

I sure hope they could win with a weapon.

But that's the point, EXACTLY! When you are a Ranger, why learn Sankaku-Jime/triangular choke and get your balls bitten off when you can hack someone in the head with the common tools/gears that you carry (this is assuming that you don't have firearms in the first place).

A decent BJJer can probably beat a Kali practitioner in a contest fight. But give both men a stick or a knife. What's going to happen?

Which is more appropriate for people who carry firearms, knives, spades and other gear? A system that teaches contest fighting or one that teaches knife, stick and disarms?

BJJ by itself is not appropriate for Rangers.

EXACTLY, again. BJJ is great for a lot of things and is quite excellent for no-time limit, contest fighting. Why? Because it was developed for such venue in Brazil. Sambo was designed from the get-go as a military non-firearm martial art and practiced as such. In their wisdom, the founders of Sambo also retained the Randori/sparring type techniques in the curriculum.

Any of them, or their arts, including Sambo, would have a lot to offer the Rangers. Most Rangers will train in several arts as they travel around anyway.

Well, you are assuming every system has the same utility to the Rangers. That is simply not so. Rangers can learn whatever they feel like in their private time. However, their government-paid training time is limited, and as such, should be used for training that confers the greatest "job-related" skills. Some systems simply aren't as useful for the military as others.

 

[Don Gwinn]

Too often I see a 25-year old woman with 5-6 years of TKD training (1-3 Dan) with a little bit of Hapkido (or Aikido or Judo) training teaching "self-defense" or "anti-rape" techniques to a bunch of wide-eyed sorority girls and housewives.

Obviously you've attended KungFool's classes before.
( at Kungfool)

 

[Bahadur]

Don Gwinn:

Oh, I gotta tell ya this horror story.

Once I saw a self-proclaimed "self-defense" instructor do a public demonstration in which he "caught" the Uke's knife by clasping his palms together (!) a la 1970's Ninja movies (above his forehead minds you - so if the attack was real, his forehead would've bled... a lot). Clearly he never heard of this steping away from the line of attack concept. Or such basic techniques as "defanging the snake" for example.

He also demonstrated a flying armbar as a self-defense technique. Since he didn't understand the mechanics of the flying armbar (as in, he could never pull it off himself), he had a young woman with a two-digit weight jump into his arm, followed by falling into her to pretend the flying armbar worked.

The galling thing was, that he was being SPONSORED (!) by a large university and the city government to do this! On top of that, he told one of my training partners (someone who actually competed in amateur Shooto and mixed martial arts competitions and was preparing to go pro) that he fought in the UFC (uh, no).

His classes were full of women looking for self-defense instruction. He also took to wearing black belts (when pressed about the origin of this belt, he answered "mine is a casual, no-nonsense system - you wear whatever belt you like because belts are meaningless").

When I was training in BJJ with my wife at a university gym (we trained under a Brazilian Pan-Am medalist, a Judo blackbelt at the same time, not to mention trained under Carlson Gracie and Rickson Gracie and one of the humblest human beings I ever met), he actually came by to criticize what WE were doing.

I dearly wished my BJJ, Muay Thai or Kali instructor was there, so this clown can see what a real instructor can do. But I sparred with this guy with my limited skill and even though he outweighed me considerably, I was submitting him and making him tap like a bongo player in no time. I could imagine what someone with real skill could do to this "self-defense expert." Well the goofy thing was that when I went by to check out his class later, he actually had security escort me out, saying that his classes are for HIS students only to witness! Apparently, he didn't want me to talk to any of his students.

When I think of all the people in his classes, particularly women, learning his master self-defense/anti-rape techniques, it still makes me wince about this kind of fraud so prevalent in "martial arts."

 

[Najdorf]

"No. What I meant was that he used sportive Sambo techniques in his mixed martial arts contests like the one with Renzo Gracie."

He was free to use whatever he wanted to. Although a few things may be technically illegal, noone ever gets disqualified for doing them. I have a taped fight of someone who advertised himself as a "Gracie Killer" gouging at my eyes in a local MMA event. He lost badly because he depended on "killer moves" instead of "fundamentals." You're clearly very knowledgeable, so I know that you're aware that people try that type strategy on them all the time.

"A decent BJJer can probably beat a Kali practitioner in a contest fight. But give both men a stick or a knife. What's going to happen?"

BJJ'ers are in general terrible with weapons except handguns, which they often carry in Brazil. Also, one BJJ'er (well known in the inner circles) is also a superb sniper. Some are actually decent with a knife.

"Well, you are assuming every system has the same utility to the Rangers."

I never said such a thing. I said that the 2 systems already mentioned, and the one that I've witnessed Rangers practicing would have a lot to offer. Some systems would have very little to offer.

I lived in Japan for a short time with a Ranger Captain who was a very skilled martial artist. I've also trained with 30 or 40 Rangers when I lived close to Ft. Benning a few years ago. I believe that exposure to a grappling art, in addition to other arts, will be useful for them.

 

[Bahadur]

Najdorf:

He was free to use whatever he wanted to. Although a few things may be technically illegal, noone ever gets disqualified for doing them.

Well, you aren't suggesting that Oleg should've pulled out a spade and thrown it straight right between Renzo's eyes, do you?

BJJ'ers are in general terrible with weapons except handguns, which they often carry in Brazil. Also, one BJJ'er (well known in the inner circles) is also a superb sniper. Some are actually decent with a knife.

I think you are really stretching it and you know it. Certainly you are not suggesting that such "superb" sniping ability or knife-handling skills come from the curriculum of BJJ?

I believe that exposure to a grappling art, in addition to other arts, will be useful for them.

Probably. But, quite frankly, unarmed hand-to-hand combat (a grappling kind at that) is really not within the realm of reality for the vast majority of the Rangers.

I am going to say this again. I practice BJJ in addition to Muay Thai and Kali. I don't have a shred of reason to stick up for Sambo other than the fact that I recognize certain truths.

BJJ was evolved from Kodokan Judo mainly for contest fighting. It's superb for that. Sambo was largely designed to train soldiers to use common military gear for fighting when firearms were unavailable. Because the founders of Sambo understood the usefulness of contests aspects (from Judo Randori and Shiai) for fitness and training, they kept the same in the system.

I've also trained with 30 or 40 Rangers when I lived close to Ft. Benning a few years ago. I believe that exposure to a grappling art, in addition to other arts, will be useful for them.

We aren't talking about whether or not BJJ is useful for the Rangers. We are talking about how best to spend the limited, government-paid training time for the Rangers. Given their specific situation and needs, and the respective strengths and weaknesses of the systems, I'd argue that Sambo is a better fit for the limited training time than BJJ.

BJJ is not the be-all, end-all of martial arts for everybody. It's not even the top dog in mixed martial arts contests anymore (well, mainly, the rules changed from what benefited BJJers to what benefits stand up strikers).

If the Rangers want to train in BJJ during their sparetime, that's great! It beats playing pool at the bar. But teach armbars and triangular chokes on government time instead of more pistol markmanship or knife-fighting (or insert anything else they carry as a part of their gear)? I think not.

It's a delicate line I walk. There are these people who tout BJJ as the "best" "street" (let alone the military) self-defense system. Then there are those who say "BJJ is only for the ring. My deadly techniques can't be shown in the ring," because their techniques are, quite frankly, useless air-dancing. Both are equally confused.

 

[wingnutx]

This discussion misses the whole point of BJJ for Rangers. They don't even pretend they are teaching them h2h combat for the real world, they are simply trying to foster an aggressive attitude in the trainees. Marines do the same thing in their bootcamp, just with a different fighting style. Most branches used to use boxing for this.

One of the reasons BJJ was selected is that you can go full-force without hurting your partner too badly.

 

[Najdorf]

Bahadur,

The source of our disagreement is that you assume Rangers don't train much, and can only train in one thing. I have been around them enough to know that they work hard and train in many things.

Wingnutz makes a good point about aggression. It's also worth noting that grappling gives you incredible cardio endurance. Under your logic (and given the improbability of being without firearms), wouldn't such added endurance be likely to help them more than spade throwing lessons?

Are you saying that Sambo only works with a spade? He could use any unarmed technique he wished.

My example of the BJJ'ers who are good with a weapon was to illustrate that BJJ people often know other things also, not that they learned it in a BJJ school. My point is that BJJ is a nice tool, but not as an only tool.

You're right that Rangers are unlikely to see unarmed combat, but we're also unlikely to see a gunfight- but here we are anyway hanging out on this forum...preparing for the unlikely.

 

[Bahadur]

wingnutx:

This discussion misses the whole point of BJJ for Rangers. They don't even pretend they are teaching them h2h combat for the real world, they are simply trying to foster an aggressive attitude in the trainees.

"Aggression," eh? Well, why not train in something (not necessarily Sambo) that fosters aggression AND teaches job-applicable skills too?

BTW, BJJ is by no means an "aggressive" martial art. I consider it, actually, a fairly patient and opportunistic system, i.e. one that takes advantage of the opponent's mistakes.

One of the reasons BJJ was selected is that you can go full-force without hurting your partner too badly.

That's a good point. But you can do the same (the Randori/free sparring part) AND more in Sambo.

Nadjdorf:

The source of our disagreement is that you assume Rangers don't train much, and can only train in one thing.

Nope. I don't assume that they "don't train much." I assume that they should NOT be spending too much of their training time on unarmed "martial art."

Under your logic (and given the improbability of being without firearms), wouldn't such added endurance be likely to help them more than spade throwing lessons?

Are you saying that Sambo only works with a spade? He could use any unarmed technique he wished.

Nope. Sambo has two aspects - sportive (the grappling part) and military. It is more "balanced," if you will. Kali, too, has both unarmed and stick/knife techniques. To suggest, for example, that a Kali practitioner "can use any unarmed technique he wished" in an unarmed, contest fight against a BJJer (who trains EXCLUSIVELY for such a venue) as a measure of which is more appropriate for soldiers, is worse than meaningless since the at least half of Kali involves knife and sticks. At most, it proves that those who train exclusively for MMA beat those who do not IN MMA matches.

You're right that Rangers are unlikely to see unarmed combat, but we're also unlikely to see a gunfight- but here we are anyway hanging out on this forum...preparing for the unlikely.

Well, Rangers are a heck of alot more likely to see fire fights with firearms than they are to see grappling in battle. It's NOT just about "preparing for the unlikely." It is about preparing for the range of probabilities, not ALL possibilities. The more probable/likely a scenario is, the more effort (meaning training and time) should be devoted. Grappling with armbars and knee bars really don't compare in the rank of probabilities to gunfights for Rangers.

God knows that I love practicing BJJ. But this whole teaching of BJJ to Rangers is a hype-based racket. I am sure that Rorion laughed all the way to the bank.

 

[Sifu Davo]

Martial Arts

Fellas

See http://www.bhome.com.au/bacfudo/ or use a search engine to look for "Sifu David Crook".

Some good stuff in there - especially Kungfool and Bahadur.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of idiots like the one you mentioned in martial arts.

As someone with 40 years experience in the Martial Arts (and a lot of time teaching Officer Survival at Police Colleges and CQB in a military situation) I see "Fighting" as quite different to "Self Defence". The first implies preparation time (eg prior to a bout) while the second implies reacting to a very rapid deterioration in circumstances - no ability to prepare for such an eventuality.

The skills needed are quite different but can be mutually supportive (like some target shooting skills - trigger control etc - are useful to IPSC shooters).

Unfortunately, many martial artists are consumed by teaching a myriad of "Techniques" rather teaching some transferable "Concepts" that can be applied in a wide range of scenarios. Surviving a serious street situation is about the 3As - Attitude, Adaptability and Aggression - not about having a bunch of really neat little moves that you can demonstrate in avery controlled environment. Unfortunately, once having learned their particular little bag of "Techniques", these idiots think that they've achieved Mastery - and that's worth bragging about.

Now, I believe that a person can't teach another without having some level of Ego - the "egoless" state doesn't really exist. So, I'm probably a bit of an Egotist - but I've never though of selling autographed pictures of me to students (even though Australian Martial Arts magazines have said that I'm one of the Top 20 instructors over here and called me "The Canberra Legend - there's that ego again!!).

I think that most people would soon come to grips with this idiot's real skill level. But how many will he have turned off getting involved in what I've found to be an extremely rewarding pursuit - in terms of the great people I've met, the impact it's had on my personal values etc?

Sifu Davo
Chief Instructor (Bac Fu Do Kung Fu)
National Vice President (Australian Kung Fu Wu Shu Federation)

 

[kungfool]

Bahadur.............Good Question.........As I said, i cannot teach ground grappling, though I do teach standing hapkido techniques and escape techniques. I talk about the many other aspects of being attacked. I teach them also to intersperse their TKD training into their practical self-defense. We are begining to act out scenarios. I try to keep the number of techniques both simple and open-ended, encouraging students to practice many times with different students.

I have also practiced several hapkido techniques through Master Jurgen Schmidt, who is a hapkido master (in a wheelchair) and is still the chief of security for master John Pellegringi.

I have honed the techniques and others with constituents who have hapkido and ju tisu backgrounds.

I am certain that in addition to Taekwondo, that my students are learning more about how to defend themselves in dangerous situations. I also heavily encourage them to cross-train in other arts ( a few actually do). I do not mis-lead them into thinking that I teach no-fail techniques. I make no claims at being an expert in any art othe than TKD. I make sure they understand that they must take what I show them and use it as a base to build good self-defense skills.

I have a good school. I am always looking for more ways to improve it.

 

[kungfool]

I just realized I never really answered your question.

I do not oversell my limited knowledge on hapkido or any other martial art.

I apply what I have learned over many years of seeing firsthand what happens in fights.

In that portion of my class, I try to be inter-active and let the students do some thinking for themselves and then evaluate them.

I think that almost anyone can teach self-defense. I believe that because so few people (especially women) do not know ANY.

BUT........whoever the person is that is teaching should be careful to limit what they teach to what they themselves can explain.

So, I have no "credentials' (officially) to teach any self-defense other than how TKD applies to street situations. I have been taught several basic hapkido locks, throws and such. Add to that my own street experience and observervances and I make sure that my students are aware of the limitations I impose on them by not knowing more than I do.


(Just noticing Don's comment............hmmmmmmmm)