In a previous post I asked about knife fighting. Ignoring the knife, what martial arts regime works best for someone over forty? I'm talking street useful training, other than sprint training at the track. It must be a regime that can be learned on a once, or twice a week schedule. I haven't yet mastered short working hours.
Martial Arts Over Forty
- Thread starter Gary H
- Start date
First of all, anyone, I mean anyone, including folks who are over forty can and will benefit from martial arts or any other athletic activity. Of course, at forty, the human body will heal and recover less quickly than at twenty, so a caution should be taken to build up the intensity slowly and gradually over time. You should definitely speak to the prospective instructor and find out if he is willing to accomdate this.
I suppose any amount of training can be helpful. However, one day a week (say one hour) is NOT enough to build skill sets in martial arts. At that rate, too much time will be spent on "going over" what was learned during the previous week. Two times a week would be better (and an absolute minimum, IMO, if you wish to continue to build new skills).
Simple combatives can be taught in a matter of hours. Unfortunately, combatives learned in such a short time will NOT build attributes and muscle-memory (skills) necessary to be able to implement those techniques "in the moment of danger" when mental and physical stresses would be tremendous.
As for styles, I would recommend functional/dynamic systems like Judo (esp. non-Olympic style), Sambo, Jeet Kune Do or Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu over form/striking-oriented "Karate," "Kung Fu" (or Wing Chun) or Tae Kwon Do. It all depends on what is available in your area.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
I suppose any amount of training can be helpful. However, one day a week (say one hour) is NOT enough to build skill sets in martial arts. At that rate, too much time will be spent on "going over" what was learned during the previous week. Two times a week would be better (and an absolute minimum, IMO, if you wish to continue to build new skills).
Simple combatives can be taught in a matter of hours. Unfortunately, combatives learned in such a short time will NOT build attributes and muscle-memory (skills) necessary to be able to implement those techniques "in the moment of danger" when mental and physical stresses would be tremendous.
As for styles, I would recommend functional/dynamic systems like Judo (esp. non-Olympic style), Sambo, Jeet Kune Do or Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu over form/striking-oriented "Karate," "Kung Fu" (or Wing Chun) or Tae Kwon Do. It all depends on what is available in your area.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
Gary,
Try going to www.tonyblauer.com I'm sure you'll find what you're looking for there. Take the time to read the info on the website and see what he has to offer. I have a few of his tapes, the two best I that I have are S.P.E.A.R. system fundamentals vol I & II (they come in a set); and "How to Beat a Grappler". I will buy more and I'll post my thoughts on those at the time. His stuff is great.
Also you might want to try Krav Maga at www.kravmaga.com Also great stuff, but like skorzeny said.. you must practice.
Remember, it's never to late to learn. The most important things in a street fight are mindset, physical fitness, and a few good techniques.
- I'm am in no way affiliated with either of these two companies.
T
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 02, 2000).]
Try going to www.tonyblauer.com I'm sure you'll find what you're looking for there. Take the time to read the info on the website and see what he has to offer. I have a few of his tapes, the two best I that I have are S.P.E.A.R. system fundamentals vol I & II (they come in a set); and "How to Beat a Grappler". I will buy more and I'll post my thoughts on those at the time. His stuff is great.
Also you might want to try Krav Maga at www.kravmaga.com Also great stuff, but like skorzeny said.. you must practice.
Remember, it's never to late to learn. The most important things in a street fight are mindset, physical fitness, and a few good techniques.
- I'm am in no way affiliated with either of these two companies.
T
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 02, 2000).]
Gary H.
I'm 52 and I practice some JKD with friends and I wrestle a lot with my daughter with a little mix of jiujitsu and judo(small circle throws, strangling, and striking.)
Besides swimming, I think wrestling is a great all around conditioner...it is not for everybody.
My daughter enjoys the practice and has already used some of the techniques when threatened by boys bigger then her.
Recently she tried out for the volleyball team in her high school. She didn't make it, but she outlasted most of the team members when they did all the physical exercises and drills without huffing and puffing. She just needs to work on her skills, but doesn't have to worry too much about stamina and that's without working out at all in summer other than a little wrestling after I get home from work.
I'm 52 and I practice some JKD with friends and I wrestle a lot with my daughter with a little mix of jiujitsu and judo(small circle throws, strangling, and striking.)
Besides swimming, I think wrestling is a great all around conditioner...it is not for everybody.
My daughter enjoys the practice and has already used some of the techniques when threatened by boys bigger then her.
Recently she tried out for the volleyball team in her high school. She didn't make it, but she outlasted most of the team members when they did all the physical exercises and drills without huffing and puffing. She just needs to work on her skills, but doesn't have to worry too much about stamina and that's without working out at all in summer other than a little wrestling after I get home from work.
I agree with LASur5r about wrestling being a great conditioner for fighting. However, wrestling is a sport and it is the last thing we want to do with a person who is intent on killing/raping/robbing/etc... What we strive for is to end a confrontaion on our feet, if we end up on the ground for some reason the next best thing is to get back to our feet as soon as possible. When you are attacked and put on the ground you ground fight you don't wrestle or grapple. This means strikes, gouges, headbuts, going to the groin but not attempting arm bars, pins or such to "hold him until the police get here."
Of course the end result we want is a chance to escape, we are not there to punish this person which means only use the force necessary to accomplish this. It is the attacker that determines the outcome of a confrontation.
T
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 03, 2000).]
Of course the end result we want is a chance to escape, we are not there to punish this person which means only use the force necessary to accomplish this. It is the attacker that determines the outcome of a confrontation.
T
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 03, 2000).]
tprT,
I agree with everything you posted...the reason why I mentioned wrestling is that one of the most important things should you get into a prolonged combat situation is conditioning.
You run out of gas fast, it really becomes an uphill fight unless you can get a quick infusion of oxygen and adrenaline...that intangible burst of energy.
I was in high school wrestling...I was a constant medal winner in my weight class and I had injured my knee in freshman year, but it was no big deal, until one night I got jumped...days when I didn't think I'd be knocked to the deck...Wrong! They double teamed me and I was on the floor on my deck like a turtle flipped over on its shell. This was before JKD and all I knew was grab the guy in front of me and cross strangle hold the guy, holding him close to me to prevent him from slamming me in the head and his partner from putting the boots to me. I choked the first guy out and I got really sore arms from all the kicks his partner gave me trying to get his partner loose. He kicked his partner a lot too but he ran when I threw the unconscious partner off of me.
Point was I almost passed out from guarding against all the struggling and hitting the guy on top of me was giving me while I was front choking him out. Then I was panicking because I didn't want the standing guy to get some good licks in so I had to drag the guy on top of me as the standing guy tried to kick me in the side of the head.
That was when I was in fair shape too.
So for all our sakes, we need to keep in shape. Lots of luck.
I agree with everything you posted...the reason why I mentioned wrestling is that one of the most important things should you get into a prolonged combat situation is conditioning.
You run out of gas fast, it really becomes an uphill fight unless you can get a quick infusion of oxygen and adrenaline...that intangible burst of energy.
I was in high school wrestling...I was a constant medal winner in my weight class and I had injured my knee in freshman year, but it was no big deal, until one night I got jumped...days when I didn't think I'd be knocked to the deck...Wrong! They double teamed me and I was on the floor on my deck like a turtle flipped over on its shell. This was before JKD and all I knew was grab the guy in front of me and cross strangle hold the guy, holding him close to me to prevent him from slamming me in the head and his partner from putting the boots to me. I choked the first guy out and I got really sore arms from all the kicks his partner gave me trying to get his partner loose. He kicked his partner a lot too but he ran when I threw the unconscious partner off of me.
Point was I almost passed out from guarding against all the struggling and hitting the guy on top of me was giving me while I was front choking him out. Then I was panicking because I didn't want the standing guy to get some good licks in so I had to drag the guy on top of me as the standing guy tried to kick me in the side of the head.
That was when I was in fair shape too.
So for all our sakes, we need to keep in shape. Lots of luck.
Sigh... Here we go again...
tprT:
Your post tells me that you don't really have a good idea of what "grappling" martial arts are about OR what fighting on the ground is all about.
First of all, I agree with you that the ground is not the place you want to me in a violent encounter. The primary reason you should be on your feet is to enable you to escape and survive the encounter. Being on the ground reduces your mobility and makes it more difficult to escape, which should be your goal from the onset.
However, in actual street encounters, it is sometimes difficult to stay on your feet. For one thing, most violent encounters aren't duels and do not start with two ment "squaring off" against each other. Attacks involve clinches, tackles, rear chokes or headlocks, sucker-punches and other unexpected assaults. Secondly, even when a fight starts with strikes, it often degenerates into clinch/grappling and then to the ground whether the people involved intended to go there or not.
In actual fights, it is extremely difficult to take advantage of "strikes, gouges, headbuts, going to the groin" as you put it while rolling about fighting for your life. There are numerous reasons why this is difficult, but the primary reason is that these are all very positionally-dependent techniques (meaning, the person in a superior position can inflict those attacks much easier than someone who is in an inferior position, for example, while being mounted).
Grappling arts such as Judo, Sambo and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu teach excellent techniques for ground escapes, turnovers as well as numerous submissions techniques that can easily turn into joint-breaking techniques (the difference between "holding" an armbar for a submission and actually breaking the elbow is almost non-existent).
Furthermore, these systems, because of the controllability (for a lack of a better word) of their techniques, can be practiced at full-speed with full-resistance (as I often say DYNAMICALLY). This, in turn, develops physical attributes (speed, power, explosiveness, endurance, body/balance sensitivity, etc.) AND teaches the practitioner how to deal with fully-resisting opponents.
These ground techniques once trained will allow the practitioner to resist, subdue or disable and escape the assault EVEN IF it goes to the ground unwittingly.
That's the point of "grappling" in self-defense context.
If you still think that "eye gouges" and other "dirty" techniques are the end-all, be-all of ground self-defense, I urge you to try the following experiment (which I've done numerous times).
Have a friend wear goggles and a cup (or any safety gear) as well as a pair of boxing gloves. Have him mount you. You will try to eye-gouge him or "go to the groin" as you put it while he punches your face away. See if you have the wherewithal to do these techniques while getting your face pummeled.
Now, in the same situation, a trained Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practitioner (for example), will immediately bridge and force the person on top to "base" himself with one or both of his hands (if he doesn't, he'll be flipped). He will then trap one of the arms and/or the head (which makes it difficult for the attacker to punch) and will bridge again to reverse the position (mind you, there are dozens and dozens of things that can be done here, but this is just an example).
BTW, I am in no way suggesting that biting, eye-gouging and such have no place in self-defense. On the contrary, they can be extremely effective and useful tools for self-defense. However, you have to train in them in a scientific and dynamic fashion. Also, such training should come AFTER the practitioner understand the fundamental positions and movements on the ground.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
tprT:
Your post tells me that you don't really have a good idea of what "grappling" martial arts are about OR what fighting on the ground is all about.
First of all, I agree with you that the ground is not the place you want to me in a violent encounter. The primary reason you should be on your feet is to enable you to escape and survive the encounter. Being on the ground reduces your mobility and makes it more difficult to escape, which should be your goal from the onset.
However, in actual street encounters, it is sometimes difficult to stay on your feet. For one thing, most violent encounters aren't duels and do not start with two ment "squaring off" against each other. Attacks involve clinches, tackles, rear chokes or headlocks, sucker-punches and other unexpected assaults. Secondly, even when a fight starts with strikes, it often degenerates into clinch/grappling and then to the ground whether the people involved intended to go there or not.
In actual fights, it is extremely difficult to take advantage of "strikes, gouges, headbuts, going to the groin" as you put it while rolling about fighting for your life. There are numerous reasons why this is difficult, but the primary reason is that these are all very positionally-dependent techniques (meaning, the person in a superior position can inflict those attacks much easier than someone who is in an inferior position, for example, while being mounted).
Grappling arts such as Judo, Sambo and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu teach excellent techniques for ground escapes, turnovers as well as numerous submissions techniques that can easily turn into joint-breaking techniques (the difference between "holding" an armbar for a submission and actually breaking the elbow is almost non-existent).
Furthermore, these systems, because of the controllability (for a lack of a better word) of their techniques, can be practiced at full-speed with full-resistance (as I often say DYNAMICALLY). This, in turn, develops physical attributes (speed, power, explosiveness, endurance, body/balance sensitivity, etc.) AND teaches the practitioner how to deal with fully-resisting opponents.
These ground techniques once trained will allow the practitioner to resist, subdue or disable and escape the assault EVEN IF it goes to the ground unwittingly.
That's the point of "grappling" in self-defense context.
If you still think that "eye gouges" and other "dirty" techniques are the end-all, be-all of ground self-defense, I urge you to try the following experiment (which I've done numerous times).
Have a friend wear goggles and a cup (or any safety gear) as well as a pair of boxing gloves. Have him mount you. You will try to eye-gouge him or "go to the groin" as you put it while he punches your face away. See if you have the wherewithal to do these techniques while getting your face pummeled.
Now, in the same situation, a trained Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practitioner (for example), will immediately bridge and force the person on top to "base" himself with one or both of his hands (if he doesn't, he'll be flipped). He will then trap one of the arms and/or the head (which makes it difficult for the attacker to punch) and will bridge again to reverse the position (mind you, there are dozens and dozens of things that can be done here, but this is just an example).
BTW, I am in no way suggesting that biting, eye-gouging and such have no place in self-defense. On the contrary, they can be extremely effective and useful tools for self-defense. However, you have to train in them in a scientific and dynamic fashion. Also, such training should come AFTER the practitioner understand the fundamental positions and movements on the ground.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
skorzeny,
You know, I thought this was a place to come and discuss our opinions and exchange ideas regarding self defense. Where people would politely throw what they believe are effective and not so effective techniques. But apparently you're one of those "hey stupid..I'm right and you're wrong" type guys. So, now here is my two cents concerning your post.
You are right, I don't have MUCH experience in wrestling, judo or JJ. That doesn't mean that I have none. I just don't believe that they are well suited for self-defense. They are sports...games, they have rules. Let me give you an example... I have no idea how a car works. I don't know what makes one car go faster than another, and I don't care. But I do know that, although it may be a fine automobile for its purpose and they may be fun to drive, a Volkswagon beetle is totally useless to me for my duties as a state trooper. That's why they make a car designed for my use. Just for those critical times. Get it? I know enough about grappling to know that they definetly have a purpose and are good skills to have, but they are not designed for true self defense.
I think that you do not really have a good idea of what takes place in as you say "actual street encounters." You say that in actual fights it is difficult to bite, gouge, strike or headbut while you are rolling around fighting for your life because they are positionally dependent? But taking somebody down and getting them into a submission hold isn't? Let me tell you, it's easier to bite and hit and kick some part of the body than it is to get them into a hold.
Then you go on to contradict yourself...1st you say that the difference between holding an armbar for a submission and actually breaking an elbow are almost non-existent. Not that these techniques won't cause injury, but in your next paragraph you say that you can practice these arts at full speed (or as you often say DYNAMICALLY). Been in a cast lately?
In your post you say "eye gouges and other dirty techniques". They are dirty fighting to you because you are thinking as a sport. That's because wrestling, judo etc are mainly for sport. When you are fighting for your life these are not dirty.
Now for your experiment that you have done many times. This works because you are going against somebody probably around the same age, around the same experience and probably around the same weight (remember..sports have weight classes? Martial arts have belt rankings. Why do you think that is?) Now, try your experiment with a petite 40 something woman being mounted by a 250 lb parolee intent on rape.. Let's see her bridge this guy twice and trap his arm and head and get him into a submission hold. Plus you say that this is one example "there are dozens and dozens of things that can be done here" (your words). Now, when her heart rate is way up there, she's full of adrenaline and fighting for her life she is supposed to choose one of these dozens of options out of the dozens of other options from the dozens of scenarios she has trained for? That's fine for the mat but not the street. It won't happen. If you teach realistic self defense you don't teach different things to men, women, old, young, big or small. If it works it works for everyone.
In your closing paragraph, you say that for biting, gougeing and such to be effective you have to train in them in a scientific and dynamic fashion. How old were you when you first learned to bite? When was the first time you poked somebody in the eye? How about a shin kick? And when do girls learn that a kick or hit into a "boys private area" is the great equalizer? Now pull your average adult off the side of the road and see if they (man or woman) can get you into any one of the dozens and dozens of brazilian jiu-jitsu submission holds. That takes "scientific and dynamic training"! Like Tony Blauer says "more people with no formal training have succesfully defended themselves than any trained martial artists have."
I am not saying that these sports have nothing to offer realistic self defense. As you said, they develop speed, power, explosiveness, endurance, body/balance sensitivity. There is no getting around that, they are excellent and it should be a part of your training. However, the other techniques are your true weapons in a life and death confrontation. Remember these along with the proper mindset. Are you familiar with Jeff Cooper's principles of personal defense? They are awareness, decisiveness, aggressiveness, speed, coolness, ruthlessness and surprise. You'd be surprised at how far these alone can take somebody.
So if it's realistic self defense you're looking for it's time to get your mind out of the dojo.
T
------------------
If not you, then who?
You know, I thought this was a place to come and discuss our opinions and exchange ideas regarding self defense. Where people would politely throw what they believe are effective and not so effective techniques. But apparently you're one of those "hey stupid..I'm right and you're wrong" type guys. So, now here is my two cents concerning your post.
You are right, I don't have MUCH experience in wrestling, judo or JJ. That doesn't mean that I have none. I just don't believe that they are well suited for self-defense. They are sports...games, they have rules. Let me give you an example... I have no idea how a car works. I don't know what makes one car go faster than another, and I don't care. But I do know that, although it may be a fine automobile for its purpose and they may be fun to drive, a Volkswagon beetle is totally useless to me for my duties as a state trooper. That's why they make a car designed for my use. Just for those critical times. Get it? I know enough about grappling to know that they definetly have a purpose and are good skills to have, but they are not designed for true self defense.
I think that you do not really have a good idea of what takes place in as you say "actual street encounters." You say that in actual fights it is difficult to bite, gouge, strike or headbut while you are rolling around fighting for your life because they are positionally dependent? But taking somebody down and getting them into a submission hold isn't? Let me tell you, it's easier to bite and hit and kick some part of the body than it is to get them into a hold.
Then you go on to contradict yourself...1st you say that the difference between holding an armbar for a submission and actually breaking an elbow are almost non-existent. Not that these techniques won't cause injury, but in your next paragraph you say that you can practice these arts at full speed (or as you often say DYNAMICALLY). Been in a cast lately?
In your post you say "eye gouges and other dirty techniques". They are dirty fighting to you because you are thinking as a sport. That's because wrestling, judo etc are mainly for sport. When you are fighting for your life these are not dirty.
Now for your experiment that you have done many times. This works because you are going against somebody probably around the same age, around the same experience and probably around the same weight (remember..sports have weight classes? Martial arts have belt rankings. Why do you think that is?) Now, try your experiment with a petite 40 something woman being mounted by a 250 lb parolee intent on rape.. Let's see her bridge this guy twice and trap his arm and head and get him into a submission hold. Plus you say that this is one example "there are dozens and dozens of things that can be done here" (your words). Now, when her heart rate is way up there, she's full of adrenaline and fighting for her life she is supposed to choose one of these dozens of options out of the dozens of other options from the dozens of scenarios she has trained for? That's fine for the mat but not the street. It won't happen. If you teach realistic self defense you don't teach different things to men, women, old, young, big or small. If it works it works for everyone.
In your closing paragraph, you say that for biting, gougeing and such to be effective you have to train in them in a scientific and dynamic fashion. How old were you when you first learned to bite? When was the first time you poked somebody in the eye? How about a shin kick? And when do girls learn that a kick or hit into a "boys private area" is the great equalizer? Now pull your average adult off the side of the road and see if they (man or woman) can get you into any one of the dozens and dozens of brazilian jiu-jitsu submission holds. That takes "scientific and dynamic training"! Like Tony Blauer says "more people with no formal training have succesfully defended themselves than any trained martial artists have."
I am not saying that these sports have nothing to offer realistic self defense. As you said, they develop speed, power, explosiveness, endurance, body/balance sensitivity. There is no getting around that, they are excellent and it should be a part of your training. However, the other techniques are your true weapons in a life and death confrontation. Remember these along with the proper mindset. Are you familiar with Jeff Cooper's principles of personal defense? They are awareness, decisiveness, aggressiveness, speed, coolness, ruthlessness and surprise. You'd be surprised at how far these alone can take somebody.
So if it's realistic self defense you're looking for it's time to get your mind out of the dojo.
T
------------------
If not you, then who?
I agree -
Stand-up techniques have their place, but 80% of all street-fighting encounters end up on the ground, according to FBI stats.
I started training in Tae-kwon-do in high school, and moved on to Jeet-kune-do in my later years. Both styles emphasize stand-up techniques such as punching, kicking, elbows, knees, etc...
I thought my fighting skills were sufficient enough to defend myself in almost any situation, until I sparred "freestyle" with a Brazillian Jiu-jitsu student. I threw one kick, and soon found myself on the ground with him on my back, cranking my neck.
I soon enrolled in the local Gracie Jiu-jitsu training chapter. Within 3 or 4 months, I was competent enough on the ground to "tap-out" other less-experienced students who outweighed me by 50-60 lbs. After about a year in training, I could hold my own against a black-belt in Judo, a 4th-degree black belt in TKD, and a state high school wrestling champ. The 4D TKD BB is a good friend of mine who has taught for over 20 years. I "tapped him out" in 2 minutes.
Brazillian Jiu-jitsu isn't the most entertaining spectator sport for the uninitiated. To a casual observer, it looks like two guys rolling around on the ground. Watching flying kicks and punches is more fun to watch, but when it comes to practical, effective self-defense, BJJ wins hands-down, IMHO.
My best advice is:
1. Study BOTH stand-up AND ground-fighting arts.
2. Finish the fight on your feet if you can, but chances are you're going to the ground.
Even a stronger, bigger experienced street fighter will eventually extend an arm, leg or neck in a fight. That is your opportunity. Lock the joint or choke him. Just don't wait for him to tap out. BREAK the joint or KNOCK HIM OUT with the choke.
Stand-up techniques have their place, but 80% of all street-fighting encounters end up on the ground, according to FBI stats.
I started training in Tae-kwon-do in high school, and moved on to Jeet-kune-do in my later years. Both styles emphasize stand-up techniques such as punching, kicking, elbows, knees, etc...
I thought my fighting skills were sufficient enough to defend myself in almost any situation, until I sparred "freestyle" with a Brazillian Jiu-jitsu student. I threw one kick, and soon found myself on the ground with him on my back, cranking my neck.
I soon enrolled in the local Gracie Jiu-jitsu training chapter. Within 3 or 4 months, I was competent enough on the ground to "tap-out" other less-experienced students who outweighed me by 50-60 lbs. After about a year in training, I could hold my own against a black-belt in Judo, a 4th-degree black belt in TKD, and a state high school wrestling champ. The 4D TKD BB is a good friend of mine who has taught for over 20 years. I "tapped him out" in 2 minutes.
Brazillian Jiu-jitsu isn't the most entertaining spectator sport for the uninitiated. To a casual observer, it looks like two guys rolling around on the ground. Watching flying kicks and punches is more fun to watch, but when it comes to practical, effective self-defense, BJJ wins hands-down, IMHO.
My best advice is:
1. Study BOTH stand-up AND ground-fighting arts.
2. Finish the fight on your feet if you can, but chances are you're going to the ground.
Even a stronger, bigger experienced street fighter will eventually extend an arm, leg or neck in a fight. That is your opportunity. Lock the joint or choke him. Just don't wait for him to tap out. BREAK the joint or KNOCK HIM OUT with the choke.
Now, try your experiment with a petite 40 something woman being mounted by a 250 lb parolee intent on rape.. Let's see her bridge this guy twice and trap his arm and head and get him into a submission hold. Plus you say that this is one example "there are dozens and dozens of things that can be done here" (your words).
Just for the record:
My daughter is 7 years old and weighs about 40 lbs. soaking wet.
I'm 30, at 170 lbs.
After about a half-hour of instruction, I can put her on her back, sit above her and put my hand on her throat as if choking her (a common rape scenario). Within a split-second, she can hold my wrist, position her legs around my neck and chest and apply enough leverage to my elbow to break it. Luckily, I taught her what "tapping out" means.
With the grappling/submission arts, size really doesn't matter...
Just for the record:
My daughter is 7 years old and weighs about 40 lbs. soaking wet.
I'm 30, at 170 lbs.
After about a half-hour of instruction, I can put her on her back, sit above her and put my hand on her throat as if choking her (a common rape scenario). Within a split-second, she can hold my wrist, position her legs around my neck and chest and apply enough leverage to my elbow to break it. Luckily, I taught her what "tapping out" means.
With the grappling/submission arts, size really doesn't matter...
I understand the FBI stats and am very familiar with them. How many of those confrontations cited do you think took place between trained subjects? If you taught all those people that went to the ground that the best place in a fight is on your feet and also how to stay there, then what do you think the % would be? During a street confrontation how many attackers do you think are trained in any martial art? Not many. How many of the guys do you think had some wrestling in high school? Probably most had some exposure to wrestling (and football)so of course they want to tackle.
Plus, I'm not saying that you can always stay on your feet during a fight. But, when you go to the ground it doesn't necessarily mean it's time to grapple. Now you're just fighting on the ground. Still hitting, biting kicking etc. If you fought those same guys you talked about beating with BJJ and instead FOUGHT them on the ground the results would be much more devestating.
Now with your examples, You trained and beat other guys much bigger than you. Then you train your young daughter for a 1/2 hour and she can take you down. Does that mean that your daughter can take thos guys down? Come on...
You guys are talking about sport... when a person is attacked on the street it is much more violent and grappling is just not practical to teach across the board. That's not to say that a grappler won't win, but there are too many variables (sex, size, etc..) to teach it as a means of self defense.
Another example, you're attacked. During a shooting,you take out 1 attacker then what do you do? Scan for others. Now you're grappling. You get your 250 lb attacker in a submission hold and you're fighting with all your strength to hold on. Now his buddy comes over and kicks you in the head. Goodnight,
We're going to have to agree to disagree. True, you should be familiar with the grappling arts, but train for a real fight. I think that martial arts are not a means of true self defense. That includes Karate, JKD, TKD and BJJ. They are meant for sport. Their true combat applications were lost years ago. So I guess you go your way and I'll go mine...(and we'll see who comes back safely ;-) )
T
Plus, I'm not saying that you can always stay on your feet during a fight. But, when you go to the ground it doesn't necessarily mean it's time to grapple. Now you're just fighting on the ground. Still hitting, biting kicking etc. If you fought those same guys you talked about beating with BJJ and instead FOUGHT them on the ground the results would be much more devestating.
Now with your examples, You trained and beat other guys much bigger than you. Then you train your young daughter for a 1/2 hour and she can take you down. Does that mean that your daughter can take thos guys down? Come on...
You guys are talking about sport... when a person is attacked on the street it is much more violent and grappling is just not practical to teach across the board. That's not to say that a grappler won't win, but there are too many variables (sex, size, etc..) to teach it as a means of self defense.
Another example, you're attacked. During a shooting,you take out 1 attacker then what do you do? Scan for others. Now you're grappling. You get your 250 lb attacker in a submission hold and you're fighting with all your strength to hold on. Now his buddy comes over and kicks you in the head. Goodnight,
We're going to have to agree to disagree. True, you should be familiar with the grappling arts, but train for a real fight. I think that martial arts are not a means of true self defense. That includes Karate, JKD, TKD and BJJ. They are meant for sport. Their true combat applications were lost years ago. So I guess you go your way and I'll go mine...(and we'll see who comes back safely ;-) )
T
tprT:
First of all, I don't believe that I ever wrote (typed) "hey stupid..I'm right and you're wrong." You are putting words into my mouth there. Aside from me pointing out your inexperience in grappling (which you admit), please try to point out where I was being impolite.
You seem to imply that I am somehow discouraging exchange of ideas. On the contrary, I am disagreeing with you based on your description of what "grappling" martial arts are like. You yourself pointed out that you don't have much experience in grappling arts. That seemed obvious to me when you purported to describe what use grappling has or does not have in actual "street" situations.
So, apparently, if I point out flaws of logic (of sorts) in your post, because your lack of experience in a certain area shows, suddenly I am discouraging exchange of ideas? It seems to me that you are the one who can't stand his ideas from being tested/challenged in an analytical fashion.
I think you ought to take things a little less personally if you want to be constructive. Just a suggestion...
As for some of the substantive issues, I will try to answer them, point-by-point (it's late, so bear with me):
1. Martial arts (or fighting system) and cars are not particularly good analogies or comparisons, but I'll go along with that line of thinking. In order for you to know whether or not a Beetle (or any Volkwagen) is good for a state trooper's duties, you would have to know quite a bit about a Beetle (first of all, what it is in the first place, how it drives, how big/sturdy it is, etc. etc.). This would be your "experience" with the Beetle, to enable you to judge whether or not it would work.
Likewise, before you can criticze the usefulness of a grappling art for self-defense, you would have to have the "experience" with one. To do otherwise would be equivalent to seeing a Car X on a magazine or TV and then closed-mindedly saying "oh, that won't work as a trooper's car, because I don't like the looks of it."
Also, when you say "get it?" I believe you are being condescending. I don't think that we need to go there? Don't you agree?
2. I called eye-gouges and such "dirty" techniques, because they are commonly known as such (hence the quotation marks). I am not implying that it is dirty to use them. Quite the contrary to what you may assume, I don't consider anything that saves one's life in a violent encounter "dirty." If you digested my previous post in its entirety, I think that is quite clear.
3. Actually, I have had quite a few violent encounters on the ground over the years. I survived quite a few of them on my own (others required outside intervention). I learned much from them. One of the thing I learned from them (and from experiences of others) is that if you are in an inferior position on the ground, it is MUCH MUCH easier for the person in the better position to use those "dirty" techniques with relative impunity. The foremost priority when on the ground should be to attain the superior position, which implies a position that gives you the control over the other (this may or may not involve joint-breaking techniques).
At that point, you can disengage and escape (which should be THE priority of the whole business - particularly for civilians) OR you can choose to remain to disable the attacker (something I do NOT recommend given unknown circumstances).
BTW, you ought to lessen your obsession with "submission holds" as being some sort of a priority in grappling arts. If you train in BJJ, for example, instructors will repeatedly tell you "position, postion, position." Beginners get fascinated with "holds," but anyone with any modicum of training soon realizes that position is what counts whether for sports or real-life.
4. Again, the fact that you do not understand the mechanism for dynamic training and submission holds shows that you have very, very little training in grappling. Let me explain this way:
Some Aikido style stand-up joint locks can ONLY be practiced statically (pre-arranged, slowy). Why? Because if you do it fast, you WILL immediately break the joint (not good for your training partner). If you practice it slowly however, you will never learn how a violent attacker may react to your technique. So, this is not very realistic training. If you do this slowy, by the way, even a five year old child will be able to escape, because only the target joint is controlled (wrist, elbow, etc.).
On the other hand, in grappling, joint-locks and other "finishing holds" require control of the opponent's body. For example, if I apply an arm-bar from the guard, one of my leg/knee is controlling my opponent's neck, while the other one is controlling his chest/stomach area. Even if I do not apply the armbar to break his arm, he cannot get away from the position. I can apply the armbar at leisure slowly if I choose, so as to allow him to "give up" (or "tap") before I break his elbow. No tap, broken elbow. That's what I mean by little difference between "submission" and actually breaking the arm. Yet, because it gives me a degree of control, I can allow my opponent to come at me at full-speed to "spar" with me, so that I can practice dealing with fully resistant opponent.
Whereas something you learned statically won't be effective at full-speed, something learned dynamically will be.
5. Actually, unlike striking arts, the beautiful thing about grappling arts is that the skill level, rather than weight, is the primary determinant of the outcome of the "fight." Every martial system claims that its practitioners can defeat opponents of bigger size/strength, but only a handful have proven those claims extensively. Grappling arts are among those handful. Why? Let's analyse this for a moment.
In boxing, no matter how skilled a 100lbs. woman can be, she will not beat a slower, less-skilled 250lbs. man. Why not? Because, she has to generate her own force (punches and kicks) to defeat him. No matter how efficient she is, he will never be able to close the gap. In grappling, however, leverage is used in most techniques.
My wife is (and I ask for my wife's forgiveness here for revealing this) 110lbs. and 5'4" (with about two years of training). She fought a 225lbs. bodybuilder with some martial arts training (Tae Kwon Do and little of this and that) with practically no rules, because he claimed that grappling was worthless to her face (this is after I submitted him in about one minute, but he was still unconvinced). He did tackle her down intially, but my wife reversed the position with the very technique (which is really basic in most grappling arts), mounted him, controlled his "bucking" around, and elbowed his face until he turtled, at which point she sank in the hooks (legs around the waist - control position) and choked him to complete uncounsciousness (takes about 2-3 seconds if you compress the carotid). I had to tear her off him. Physically, my wife is quite an ordinary person, but I made sure that her training was top-rate and it worked beautifully.
Don't get me wrong, weight and strength matter a great deal PARTICULARLY if other factors are equal or similar. Otherwise, appropriate skills are pre-dominant.
Another thing that she did really well (and made me extremely proud) was that she remained calm when she was tackled down. Why? Because she has been taken down and mounted numerous times during sparring. It didn't faze her or scare her PRECISELY BECAUSE she knew how to counter this and was certain of her ability to do so. This is another benefit of dynamic training (sparring).
6. You confuse someone's ability to bite down on his/her food reflexively as a five year-old with the ability to bite the appropriate area of an opponent's body WHILE protecting oneself from his attacks (which MAY include similar methods).
One of the foremost experts of "dirty" techniques is Paul Vunak who has trained numerous military, police and civilian personnel in Jeet Kune Do, Kali and Kina Mutai (Kina Mutai is a system devoted to biting, eye-gouging, etc. in the most effective fashion).
Vunak teaches you what and how to bite, gouge, scratch, grab WHILE protecting yourself from the same attacks as well as "conventional" punches, kicks and elbows. He has more experience in this (street fights AND "Dojo" time) than probably anybody else in the country. He emphasizes the importance of POSITION time and again (and again...). When someone has mounted you and punching your face away is NOT the right time to try to eye-gouge, bite, whatever. You will be too busy to cover your face. There are circumstances when such attacks are appropriate. There are other times when you need to learn how to reverse or shift positions. If you get a chance, learn from Vunak. He has earned high praises from FBI, the SEALs, Army Special Forces, DEA, etc. etc.
7. I am familiar with COL Cooper's maxims. I don't see how they are incompatible with learning useful and effective techniques, which will helped to cement those principles.
Lastly, regarding your response to pocat's post:
A. Most fights end up on the ground NOT because most people have wrestling experience as you put it. On the contrary, a vast majority of the populatin (even male population) have no formal wrestling training (I do not consider imitating WWF "wrestling" training).
The reason fights end up on the ground is BECAUSE fights progress to the "clinch" while standing at some point. The reason you get to the "clinch" is because of natural proclivity of human being to seek safety. When in a fight (exchanging blows), people do one of two things (in general) - they either back away (in which case it turns to flight) or they try to clinch so that they longer get punched/kicked etc. What do boxers do (even though they have absolutely no training in the "trapping" or "grappling" range) when they start getting hit? They either back away or clinch.
B. In your scenario, you do not "hold" the armbar. You break the elbow right away and try to disengage. Where do you get the notion of "holding" anything? In any case, fighting (on the ground) against multiple attackers whether you use armbars or biting is bad business. Chances are, one way or another, you may get a soccer kick in the head from the other attacker. This requires another big post, so I'll refrain from this for now...
But, let me just say that without a suitable WEAPON (an equalizer) and DISTANCE to deploy the weapon, it will be difficult to fight two or more people whatever technique (eye-gouging, armbar, whatever) or style of fighting you use. This is also from too many personal experiences...
BTW, I apologize to everyone for my long, long post.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
[This message has been edited by Skorzeny (edited October 05, 2000).]
First of all, I don't believe that I ever wrote (typed) "hey stupid..I'm right and you're wrong." You are putting words into my mouth there. Aside from me pointing out your inexperience in grappling (which you admit), please try to point out where I was being impolite.
You seem to imply that I am somehow discouraging exchange of ideas. On the contrary, I am disagreeing with you based on your description of what "grappling" martial arts are like. You yourself pointed out that you don't have much experience in grappling arts. That seemed obvious to me when you purported to describe what use grappling has or does not have in actual "street" situations.
So, apparently, if I point out flaws of logic (of sorts) in your post, because your lack of experience in a certain area shows, suddenly I am discouraging exchange of ideas? It seems to me that you are the one who can't stand his ideas from being tested/challenged in an analytical fashion.
I think you ought to take things a little less personally if you want to be constructive. Just a suggestion...
As for some of the substantive issues, I will try to answer them, point-by-point (it's late, so bear with me):
1. Martial arts (or fighting system) and cars are not particularly good analogies or comparisons, but I'll go along with that line of thinking. In order for you to know whether or not a Beetle (or any Volkwagen) is good for a state trooper's duties, you would have to know quite a bit about a Beetle (first of all, what it is in the first place, how it drives, how big/sturdy it is, etc. etc.). This would be your "experience" with the Beetle, to enable you to judge whether or not it would work.
Likewise, before you can criticze the usefulness of a grappling art for self-defense, you would have to have the "experience" with one. To do otherwise would be equivalent to seeing a Car X on a magazine or TV and then closed-mindedly saying "oh, that won't work as a trooper's car, because I don't like the looks of it."
Also, when you say "get it?" I believe you are being condescending. I don't think that we need to go there? Don't you agree?
2. I called eye-gouges and such "dirty" techniques, because they are commonly known as such (hence the quotation marks). I am not implying that it is dirty to use them. Quite the contrary to what you may assume, I don't consider anything that saves one's life in a violent encounter "dirty." If you digested my previous post in its entirety, I think that is quite clear.
3. Actually, I have had quite a few violent encounters on the ground over the years. I survived quite a few of them on my own (others required outside intervention). I learned much from them. One of the thing I learned from them (and from experiences of others) is that if you are in an inferior position on the ground, it is MUCH MUCH easier for the person in the better position to use those "dirty" techniques with relative impunity. The foremost priority when on the ground should be to attain the superior position, which implies a position that gives you the control over the other (this may or may not involve joint-breaking techniques).
At that point, you can disengage and escape (which should be THE priority of the whole business - particularly for civilians) OR you can choose to remain to disable the attacker (something I do NOT recommend given unknown circumstances).
BTW, you ought to lessen your obsession with "submission holds" as being some sort of a priority in grappling arts. If you train in BJJ, for example, instructors will repeatedly tell you "position, postion, position." Beginners get fascinated with "holds," but anyone with any modicum of training soon realizes that position is what counts whether for sports or real-life.
4. Again, the fact that you do not understand the mechanism for dynamic training and submission holds shows that you have very, very little training in grappling. Let me explain this way:
Some Aikido style stand-up joint locks can ONLY be practiced statically (pre-arranged, slowy). Why? Because if you do it fast, you WILL immediately break the joint (not good for your training partner). If you practice it slowly however, you will never learn how a violent attacker may react to your technique. So, this is not very realistic training. If you do this slowy, by the way, even a five year old child will be able to escape, because only the target joint is controlled (wrist, elbow, etc.).
On the other hand, in grappling, joint-locks and other "finishing holds" require control of the opponent's body. For example, if I apply an arm-bar from the guard, one of my leg/knee is controlling my opponent's neck, while the other one is controlling his chest/stomach area. Even if I do not apply the armbar to break his arm, he cannot get away from the position. I can apply the armbar at leisure slowly if I choose, so as to allow him to "give up" (or "tap") before I break his elbow. No tap, broken elbow. That's what I mean by little difference between "submission" and actually breaking the arm. Yet, because it gives me a degree of control, I can allow my opponent to come at me at full-speed to "spar" with me, so that I can practice dealing with fully resistant opponent.
Whereas something you learned statically won't be effective at full-speed, something learned dynamically will be.
5. Actually, unlike striking arts, the beautiful thing about grappling arts is that the skill level, rather than weight, is the primary determinant of the outcome of the "fight." Every martial system claims that its practitioners can defeat opponents of bigger size/strength, but only a handful have proven those claims extensively. Grappling arts are among those handful. Why? Let's analyse this for a moment.
In boxing, no matter how skilled a 100lbs. woman can be, she will not beat a slower, less-skilled 250lbs. man. Why not? Because, she has to generate her own force (punches and kicks) to defeat him. No matter how efficient she is, he will never be able to close the gap. In grappling, however, leverage is used in most techniques.
My wife is (and I ask for my wife's forgiveness here for revealing this) 110lbs. and 5'4" (with about two years of training). She fought a 225lbs. bodybuilder with some martial arts training (Tae Kwon Do and little of this and that) with practically no rules, because he claimed that grappling was worthless to her face (this is after I submitted him in about one minute, but he was still unconvinced). He did tackle her down intially, but my wife reversed the position with the very technique (which is really basic in most grappling arts), mounted him, controlled his "bucking" around, and elbowed his face until he turtled, at which point she sank in the hooks (legs around the waist - control position) and choked him to complete uncounsciousness (takes about 2-3 seconds if you compress the carotid). I had to tear her off him. Physically, my wife is quite an ordinary person, but I made sure that her training was top-rate and it worked beautifully.
Don't get me wrong, weight and strength matter a great deal PARTICULARLY if other factors are equal or similar. Otherwise, appropriate skills are pre-dominant.
Another thing that she did really well (and made me extremely proud) was that she remained calm when she was tackled down. Why? Because she has been taken down and mounted numerous times during sparring. It didn't faze her or scare her PRECISELY BECAUSE she knew how to counter this and was certain of her ability to do so. This is another benefit of dynamic training (sparring).
6. You confuse someone's ability to bite down on his/her food reflexively as a five year-old with the ability to bite the appropriate area of an opponent's body WHILE protecting oneself from his attacks (which MAY include similar methods).
One of the foremost experts of "dirty" techniques is Paul Vunak who has trained numerous military, police and civilian personnel in Jeet Kune Do, Kali and Kina Mutai (Kina Mutai is a system devoted to biting, eye-gouging, etc. in the most effective fashion).
Vunak teaches you what and how to bite, gouge, scratch, grab WHILE protecting yourself from the same attacks as well as "conventional" punches, kicks and elbows. He has more experience in this (street fights AND "Dojo" time) than probably anybody else in the country. He emphasizes the importance of POSITION time and again (and again...). When someone has mounted you and punching your face away is NOT the right time to try to eye-gouge, bite, whatever. You will be too busy to cover your face. There are circumstances when such attacks are appropriate. There are other times when you need to learn how to reverse or shift positions. If you get a chance, learn from Vunak. He has earned high praises from FBI, the SEALs, Army Special Forces, DEA, etc. etc.
7. I am familiar with COL Cooper's maxims. I don't see how they are incompatible with learning useful and effective techniques, which will helped to cement those principles.
Lastly, regarding your response to pocat's post:
A. Most fights end up on the ground NOT because most people have wrestling experience as you put it. On the contrary, a vast majority of the populatin (even male population) have no formal wrestling training (I do not consider imitating WWF "wrestling" training).
The reason fights end up on the ground is BECAUSE fights progress to the "clinch" while standing at some point. The reason you get to the "clinch" is because of natural proclivity of human being to seek safety. When in a fight (exchanging blows), people do one of two things (in general) - they either back away (in which case it turns to flight) or they try to clinch so that they longer get punched/kicked etc. What do boxers do (even though they have absolutely no training in the "trapping" or "grappling" range) when they start getting hit? They either back away or clinch.
B. In your scenario, you do not "hold" the armbar. You break the elbow right away and try to disengage. Where do you get the notion of "holding" anything? In any case, fighting (on the ground) against multiple attackers whether you use armbars or biting is bad business. Chances are, one way or another, you may get a soccer kick in the head from the other attacker. This requires another big post, so I'll refrain from this for now...
But, let me just say that without a suitable WEAPON (an equalizer) and DISTANCE to deploy the weapon, it will be difficult to fight two or more people whatever technique (eye-gouging, armbar, whatever) or style of fighting you use. This is also from too many personal experiences...
BTW, I apologize to everyone for my long, long post.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
[This message has been edited by Skorzeny (edited October 05, 2000).]
Then you train your young daughter for a 1/2 hour and she can take you down. Does that mean that your daughter can take thos guys down? Come on...
I think you need to read my post again. She did not "take me down." We started on the ground on her back (guard position) - that is where a smaller female will usually end up during a rape.
One cannot expect a smaller woman to stand up, toe-to-toe and knock out or incapcitate her attacker. YES - she should try to use EVERY defense in her arsenal (groin kicks, eye-gouges, etc.) to end it or get away on her feet. I also said this in my other post.
True, you should be familiar with the grappling arts, but train for a real fight. I think that martial arts are not a means of true self defense. That includes Karate, JKD, TKD and BJJ. They are meant for sport.
I have to say that the most experience I have gotten for a real-life-or-death fight was in BJJ. In some classes, we put on the gloves and went "all-out" as much as we could, without serious injury. I will admit that strikes being thrown on the ground makes a submission more difficult, but still very possible. However - I would much rather have a larger person striking me OFF of his feet, with less weight and power behind his punches than ON his feet.
Yes, modern Karate-do is mostly "sporterized," as is TKD. JKD, however, is not an art aimed toward "sport" or competition. The school I went to taught practical, effective self-defense techniques, most of it stand-up. Winning trophies or being awarded "belts" were not emphasised.
Bruce Lee's philisophy was "Absorb what is useful, discard what isn't." I'm not saying here that the striking arts are useless, and grappling is superior. If a person is serious about surviving a violent street encounter, he needs to study BOTH and use what works best for him, as he should find out through training. Can we agree on this?
I think you need to read my post again. She did not "take me down." We started on the ground on her back (guard position) - that is where a smaller female will usually end up during a rape.
One cannot expect a smaller woman to stand up, toe-to-toe and knock out or incapcitate her attacker. YES - she should try to use EVERY defense in her arsenal (groin kicks, eye-gouges, etc.) to end it or get away on her feet. I also said this in my other post.
True, you should be familiar with the grappling arts, but train for a real fight. I think that martial arts are not a means of true self defense. That includes Karate, JKD, TKD and BJJ. They are meant for sport.
I have to say that the most experience I have gotten for a real-life-or-death fight was in BJJ. In some classes, we put on the gloves and went "all-out" as much as we could, without serious injury. I will admit that strikes being thrown on the ground makes a submission more difficult, but still very possible. However - I would much rather have a larger person striking me OFF of his feet, with less weight and power behind his punches than ON his feet.
Yes, modern Karate-do is mostly "sporterized," as is TKD. JKD, however, is not an art aimed toward "sport" or competition. The school I went to taught practical, effective self-defense techniques, most of it stand-up. Winning trophies or being awarded "belts" were not emphasised.
Bruce Lee's philisophy was "Absorb what is useful, discard what isn't." I'm not saying here that the striking arts are useless, and grappling is superior. If a person is serious about surviving a violent street encounter, he needs to study BOTH and use what works best for him, as he should find out through training. Can we agree on this?
skorzeny,
This is going to be shorter that planned. I had a long reply all typed out, then lost it when I hit my back button. I worked all night and need to get to bed. Maybe impolite was the wrong term, which I didn't say but guess I did imply it. Condescending is probably a better way to describe the start of your post. Maybe it wasn't meant that way but it was taken that way.
In my post I refer to submission holds because of your (and Pocat's) use of the term and the references to "tapping out". If you tap out, you submit correct?
I know there are good things to learn from grappling, escapes for one. Also, if I had more time in my life and a school nearby I would surely be learning BJJ. I do believe it is the most useful of the martial arts and I am envious of anyone who does have the opportunity to learn it.
I don't believe that it is a realistic self defense method though. You can not convince me that a female (or a male for that matter) trained in BJJ has much of a chance ending a fight against a larger male by grappling (I am talking about a street confrontation here, a true assault, not just sparring on a mat.) Not only do you have a question of strength, but the addition of drugs and alcohol that lessen the effect of pain, and mental illness. The strongest person I've had to wrestle was mentally ill. It took 3 troopers and 2 ambulance attendants to fully restrain him even after he was handcuffed. Pain DID NOT phase him. And he was 60 years old! If he was actively attacking us, we would have had to seriously injure him to get him to stop.
So, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. The proper mindset and physical fitness along with whatever works for you is what we'll agree to o.k? Truce?
By the way, I am familiar with the chokes and am very respectful of them if they are able to be applied in the course of a confrontation. Here's a question: Where do you think you stand legally with a choke? Say a female is attacked and is able to and is justified to choke her assailant. He loses consciousness. While he is unconscious he is no longer a danger to her so she is no longer justified in choking. Escape is not a realistic option due to location of the attack or whatever. Does she keep applying the choke knowing that this may cause brain damage or death? Or does she release not knowing what to expect when he regains consciousness seconds after she does release?
T
To Gary H: When you first posted did you ever expect this firestorm?
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 05, 2000).]
This is going to be shorter that planned. I had a long reply all typed out, then lost it when I hit my back button. I worked all night and need to get to bed. Maybe impolite was the wrong term, which I didn't say but guess I did imply it. Condescending is probably a better way to describe the start of your post. Maybe it wasn't meant that way but it was taken that way.
In my post I refer to submission holds because of your (and Pocat's) use of the term and the references to "tapping out". If you tap out, you submit correct?
I know there are good things to learn from grappling, escapes for one. Also, if I had more time in my life and a school nearby I would surely be learning BJJ. I do believe it is the most useful of the martial arts and I am envious of anyone who does have the opportunity to learn it.
I don't believe that it is a realistic self defense method though. You can not convince me that a female (or a male for that matter) trained in BJJ has much of a chance ending a fight against a larger male by grappling (I am talking about a street confrontation here, a true assault, not just sparring on a mat.) Not only do you have a question of strength, but the addition of drugs and alcohol that lessen the effect of pain, and mental illness. The strongest person I've had to wrestle was mentally ill. It took 3 troopers and 2 ambulance attendants to fully restrain him even after he was handcuffed. Pain DID NOT phase him. And he was 60 years old! If he was actively attacking us, we would have had to seriously injure him to get him to stop.
So, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. The proper mindset and physical fitness along with whatever works for you is what we'll agree to o.k? Truce?
By the way, I am familiar with the chokes and am very respectful of them if they are able to be applied in the course of a confrontation. Here's a question: Where do you think you stand legally with a choke? Say a female is attacked and is able to and is justified to choke her assailant. He loses consciousness. While he is unconscious he is no longer a danger to her so she is no longer justified in choking. Escape is not a realistic option due to location of the attack or whatever. Does she keep applying the choke knowing that this may cause brain damage or death? Or does she release not knowing what to expect when he regains consciousness seconds after she does release?
T
To Gary H: When you first posted did you ever expect this firestorm?
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 05, 2000).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gary H:
New to all of this. Is this what you call "grappling"?[/quote]
Yes, VERBAL grappling.
Asking opinions about the Martial Arts is like bringing up religion or politics at Thanksgiving dinner - sure to be a "lively" conversation.
Good to have this discussion with all involved.
New to all of this. Is this what you call "grappling"?[/quote]
Yes, VERBAL grappling.
Asking opinions about the Martial Arts is like bringing up religion or politics at Thanksgiving dinner - sure to be a "lively" conversation.
Good to have this discussion with all involved.
Originally posted by tprT:
"Here's a question: Where do you think you stand legally with a choke? Say a female is attacked and is able to and is justified to choke her assailant. He loses consciousness. While he is unconscious he is no longer a danger to her so she is no longer justified in choking. Escape is not a realistic option due to location of the attack or whatever. Does she keep applying the choke knowing that this may cause brain damage or death? Or does she release not knowing what to expect when he regains consciousness seconds after she does release?"
Well, presuming this is a man attacking a woman, the theory of disparity of force probably applies. If the woman was in danger of death or grave bodily injury (and rape is considered to be grave bodily injury), then the woman is justified in using deadly force.
Regarding your disbelief that a woman could control a larger man, I think you just need to go to a BJJ gym and spar with a woman.
You're correct that some folks don't respond to pain compliance. But BJJ isn't just pain compliance. It's leverage.
M1911
"Here's a question: Where do you think you stand legally with a choke? Say a female is attacked and is able to and is justified to choke her assailant. He loses consciousness. While he is unconscious he is no longer a danger to her so she is no longer justified in choking. Escape is not a realistic option due to location of the attack or whatever. Does she keep applying the choke knowing that this may cause brain damage or death? Or does she release not knowing what to expect when he regains consciousness seconds after she does release?"
Well, presuming this is a man attacking a woman, the theory of disparity of force probably applies. If the woman was in danger of death or grave bodily injury (and rape is considered to be grave bodily injury), then the woman is justified in using deadly force.
Regarding your disbelief that a woman could control a larger man, I think you just need to go to a BJJ gym and spar with a woman.
You're correct that some folks don't respond to pain compliance. But BJJ isn't just pain compliance. It's leverage.
M1911
Whew... Few additional points:
BJJ is NOT "the most useful of the martial arts." It is very useful, but there are other things that are equally useful in their contexts. It all depends on contexts. For example, I think that BJJ is more useful for a civilian woman interested in anti-rape/self-defense than a Navy SEAL interested in military CQC.
BJJ is not a primarily strength-based grappling system. It is leverage-based! In that regard, it is VERY DIFFERENT from Greco-Roman or freestyle wrestling, which is very much power- and explosiveness-based.
Best I can do is to say, go to a BJJ school, pick a little woman or a really small guy and ask him/her. He/she will make you (a presumably bigger guy) feel helpless on the ground and may toy around with you (that's what happened to me the first time I tried it - man, was my ego hurt!). I guess seeing (or feeling it) is believing...
The rest, M1911 answered well. A drugged "big guy" may be pain-tolerant, but he cannot violate the laws of physics. He can be thrown on his head just as easily as anyone else (probably easier due to his lack of control and balance). No matter how drugged, if his elbow is broken, he will not be able to use his arm. An one-armed man is a whole lot easier to deal with than a two-armed man!
Think of joint-breaking techniques or chokes as not the "end-all," but as a means or a tool to make it possible or easier for you to attian a superior position, disengage, escape, survive and so on.
Lastly, you are right in that the "mat" is not the street. But, training full-force, fully-resistant on the "mat" is heck of a lot more realistic approximation of, and effective training for, the "street" than practicing punches, kicks or eye-gouging in slow-motion.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
BJJ is NOT "the most useful of the martial arts." It is very useful, but there are other things that are equally useful in their contexts. It all depends on contexts. For example, I think that BJJ is more useful for a civilian woman interested in anti-rape/self-defense than a Navy SEAL interested in military CQC.
BJJ is not a primarily strength-based grappling system. It is leverage-based! In that regard, it is VERY DIFFERENT from Greco-Roman or freestyle wrestling, which is very much power- and explosiveness-based.
Best I can do is to say, go to a BJJ school, pick a little woman or a really small guy and ask him/her. He/she will make you (a presumably bigger guy) feel helpless on the ground and may toy around with you (that's what happened to me the first time I tried it - man, was my ego hurt!). I guess seeing (or feeling it) is believing...
The rest, M1911 answered well. A drugged "big guy" may be pain-tolerant, but he cannot violate the laws of physics. He can be thrown on his head just as easily as anyone else (probably easier due to his lack of control and balance). No matter how drugged, if his elbow is broken, he will not be able to use his arm. An one-armed man is a whole lot easier to deal with than a two-armed man!
Think of joint-breaking techniques or chokes as not the "end-all," but as a means or a tool to make it possible or easier for you to attian a superior position, disengage, escape, survive and so on.
Lastly, you are right in that the "mat" is not the street. But, training full-force, fully-resistant on the "mat" is heck of a lot more realistic approximation of, and effective training for, the "street" than practicing punches, kicks or eye-gouging in slow-motion.
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
Wow this is getting long....
" think that BJJ is more useful for a civilian woman interested in anti-rape/self-defense than a Navy SEAL interested in military CQC."
Why?
"Best I can do is to say, go to a BJJ school, pick a little woman or a really small guy and ask him/her. He/she will make you (a presumably bigger guy) feel helpless on the ground and may toy around with you (that's what happened to me the first time I tried it - man, was my ego hurt!)."
But you are talking about an untrained grappler, grappling with a trained grappler. (wow..say that 5 times fast!)
Go back and find that same female and challenge her again. When she starts to move in to grapple with you, hit her with a quick flury of punches, elbows and kicks. I guarentee she won't be toying with you on the mat.
"He can be thrown on his head just as easily as anyone else (probably easier due to his lack of control and balance). "
Not all drugs affect your control and balance to the same degree as say alcohol does. Don't count on this.
/ No matter how drugged, if his elbow is broken, he will not be able to use his arm./
Assuming you get the opportunity to break the elbow. Again this is most easily accomplished when both people are grappling, not during a violent assault by one of the parties.
" But, training full-force, fully-resistant on the "mat" is heck of a lot more realistic approximation of, and effective training for, the "street" "
Once again, you are talking about both partners grappling. Not one person assaulting the other.
"than practicing punches, kicks or eye-gouging in slow-motion."
There are several brands of protective suits that allow you to train at higher speeds. "Redman" suits "High Gear Impact Reduction" suits. Of course you can't go all out but you can come pretty close. They also provide the benefit of allowing you to take some blows that cause pain without causing injury.
In one of your earlier posts you talked about strikes etc. being positionally dependant. Try this exercise...Begin grappling with a partner. After about 30 seconds to a minute have somebody say freeze. Both partners do not move. Look to see where you are and the opportunities you have. A strike to a tender area, a bite, a gouge, a knee strike, an elbow strike. There is always something. If nothing else it will help you get your better position for your locks etc. Don't limit your targets to eyes, nose, chin, groin. There are targets everywhere....especially for a bite. Bite somebody almost anywhere and you can almost always count on a quick follow up target becoming available (better position?)
Back to my question again....we have already established that this woman is justified in using deadly physical force ie. the choke.
The rapist or whatever, loses consciousness so is no longer a threat to her. However, when she releases the choke he will regain consciousness quickly, possibly once again becoming a threat but we don't know if be will be or not. Again escape is not an option under this circumstance. Is she justified in holding the choke until help arrives which may cause his death in the mean time? Or is she required to release and wait to see if he again becomes a threat taking the chance that she won't be able to gain control a second time? Maybe take the few second opportunity to get some kind of less lethal hold before he regaines?
[/B][/QUOTE]
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 06, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 06, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 06, 2000).]
" think that BJJ is more useful for a civilian woman interested in anti-rape/self-defense than a Navy SEAL interested in military CQC."
Why?
"Best I can do is to say, go to a BJJ school, pick a little woman or a really small guy and ask him/her. He/she will make you (a presumably bigger guy) feel helpless on the ground and may toy around with you (that's what happened to me the first time I tried it - man, was my ego hurt!)."
But you are talking about an untrained grappler, grappling with a trained grappler. (wow..say that 5 times fast!)
Go back and find that same female and challenge her again. When she starts to move in to grapple with you, hit her with a quick flury of punches, elbows and kicks. I guarentee she won't be toying with you on the mat.
"He can be thrown on his head just as easily as anyone else (probably easier due to his lack of control and balance). "
Not all drugs affect your control and balance to the same degree as say alcohol does. Don't count on this.
/ No matter how drugged, if his elbow is broken, he will not be able to use his arm./
Assuming you get the opportunity to break the elbow. Again this is most easily accomplished when both people are grappling, not during a violent assault by one of the parties.
" But, training full-force, fully-resistant on the "mat" is heck of a lot more realistic approximation of, and effective training for, the "street" "
Once again, you are talking about both partners grappling. Not one person assaulting the other.
"than practicing punches, kicks or eye-gouging in slow-motion."
There are several brands of protective suits that allow you to train at higher speeds. "Redman" suits "High Gear Impact Reduction" suits. Of course you can't go all out but you can come pretty close. They also provide the benefit of allowing you to take some blows that cause pain without causing injury.
In one of your earlier posts you talked about strikes etc. being positionally dependant. Try this exercise...Begin grappling with a partner. After about 30 seconds to a minute have somebody say freeze. Both partners do not move. Look to see where you are and the opportunities you have. A strike to a tender area, a bite, a gouge, a knee strike, an elbow strike. There is always something. If nothing else it will help you get your better position for your locks etc. Don't limit your targets to eyes, nose, chin, groin. There are targets everywhere....especially for a bite. Bite somebody almost anywhere and you can almost always count on a quick follow up target becoming available (better position?)
Back to my question again....we have already established that this woman is justified in using deadly physical force ie. the choke.
The rapist or whatever, loses consciousness so is no longer a threat to her. However, when she releases the choke he will regain consciousness quickly, possibly once again becoming a threat but we don't know if be will be or not. Again escape is not an option under this circumstance. Is she justified in holding the choke until help arrives which may cause his death in the mean time? Or is she required to release and wait to see if he again becomes a threat taking the chance that she won't be able to gain control a second time? Maybe take the few second opportunity to get some kind of less lethal hold before he regaines?
[/B][/QUOTE]
------------------
If not you, then who?
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 06, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 06, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by tprT (edited October 06, 2000).]