# Bear Hugs - Practical or Impractical



## Disco (Jun 11, 2004)

I know the Kenpo people had something similar in discussion a while back. But I'm looking for an overall opinion related to training defense against a rear bear hug. I have trained in the what I like to call "static" defense against the BH. Everything taught works. The problem arises from the practical aspect of someone putting you in a static bear hug. By static I mean you have ample time to shift, lower, etc. Everytime I have witnessed a bear hug done in aggression, and I can count the number of times on half a hand, it was never static. The person being bear hugged was picked up immediately and dumped hard. The fight was over at that point. There was no time to defend and no defense that I could/can think of for that situation. Kind of made all the training in BH defense a moot point.

Question is, what if any is the practical concept of still teaching people the static application defenses to a bear hug? Personally, I can't see any.......


----------



## TigerWoman (Jun 11, 2004)

On a static bear hug.  I guess we are trained in TKD to react fast to any type of bear hug. Front or back. We have four types of defenses if your arms are pinned. If the attacker is in back and my feet on on the ground, I would kick to to groin and back head butt.  If I'm in the air, I could still head butt....and kick back, before getting supposedly thrown to the ground. And if i subsequently get my arms free, too, I've got all my tools.
Even after landing on the ground there are defenses...But, there's alot I could do before.  I'm not going to just not do anything. The purpose of training is to react fast though. Any defense has to be done quickly and precisely. It all comes from training, doing it over and over as real as you can without damaging your partner.  So not too practical for the attacker, to attack with a bear hug  someone already trained in defense.  Key word is trained.


----------



## Gary Crawford (Jun 11, 2004)

I think Brazilian Jujitsu probably has a defense that would really work.


----------



## TigerWoman (Jun 11, 2004)

Gary Crawford said:
			
		

> I think Brazilian Jujitsu probably has a defense that would really work.



But you didn't tell us HOW it would work so how can we tell if Jujitsu has a defense that would "really" work?  I know my method would work, but we all are open to new approaches. But a statement proves nothing. Respectfully, Tigerwoman


----------



## MisterMike (Jun 11, 2004)

I'd say you still have half a second or so to do something before you hit the ground. Off the ground or not, there is still plenty you can do.

It's almost like "Why train for club attacks if someone is just going to club you from behind anyways?"

The bear hug is still there, it just turned into a followup throw. I'd suggest training for the what-if's as well.


----------



## Gary Crawford (Jun 11, 2004)

TigerWoman,What I mean is,that in a situation when someone bearhugs you and thows you to the ground,groundfighting skills must come into play,there is no specific technique there.The fact that many, if not most real fights go to the ground is why it's a good idea to be very familiar with several ground fighting techniques.


----------



## bluenosekenpo (Jun 11, 2004)

if i 'm not mistaken, it really comes down to reaction time and whether he's trying to pick you up or drag you down with the bearhug. here's a suggestion, go to a grappling class, and get one of those guys to put you on the ground using a bearhug. it's an eye opener because if you don't react immediatly, you will become a human piledriver, and we haven't even talked about a suplez(not sure about the spelling), which is the bearhug driving you backwards onto your head. to paraphrase larry tatum, if you allow someone to set and lock a bearhug, you are in serious trouble. 

i completely agree with disco, the bh can be deadly. the only option is to react quickly and do something,anything and fight for your life. that's pretty lame as far as techs go, but that's reality. regards :asian:


----------



## Kempojujutsu (Jun 11, 2004)

Front bear hug with the arms pinned. we use pushing on the attackers hips as you step back to created a good base. Follow with a knee. The hands placed on the hips could attack the groin. I believe BJJ uses something similar to this.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 11, 2004)

Depending upon your present awareness level a (rear) Bear-hug can be a nasty thing to happen. 
As for myself, it depends if I"m being aware of nothing, everything or something. I may or may not be caught off guard depending upon where I'm at. 
I've learned several and are learning several more counters to get out of bear-hugs. I'm willing to take the guy down to the ground myself by locking my feet behind his knees (raising my legs up to do so thus giving him more weight to support and throwing him off balance), and then thrusting my own body weight backwards forcing him to go down with me on top of him. This isn't 100% because the guy might roll either way at the last second... but at that point I"m able to thrust one of my legs out enough to slow the fall and at least *I* do not hit the ground hard. 
But I've been grabbed from behind by a (college) linebacker (for fun...at least it was for him) and was picked up and was going to be carried through the wall... feets don't fail me now...


----------



## Disco (Jun 11, 2004)

MisterMike feels there is enough time to do something. All I can suggest is that you have it done to you. If your unprepared you'll be shocked. Even if your prepared, you know what your training partner is going to do to you, it will still be an eye opener if it's done full bore. 

The concept of this thread is to see if it's really worth the time and effort to teach techniques that in reality only work in a controlled setting.


----------



## TigerWoman (Jun 11, 2004)

Gary Crawford said:
			
		

> TigerWoman,What I mean is,that in a situation when someone bearhugs you and thows you to the ground,groundfighting skills must come into play,there is no specific technique there.The fact that many, if not most real fights go to the ground is why it's a good idea to be very familiar with several ground fighting techniques.



I don't understand "when someone bearhugs you and throws you to the ground, groundfighting skills must come into play".  When someone bearhugs me, I have a second or two to do some major damage that will avoid me being thrown too the ground."  In the event, I am thrown to the ground without me crunching his groin, headbutting him, or getting free and doing more damage, and he gets past me, yeah, I would have to use groundfighting techniques but there is no "MUST" since it doesn't have to happen IMO unless you are weak at above ground self defense and at striking.


----------



## Disco (Jun 11, 2004)

TigerWoman, with all due respect. You have not been put into the bear hug I am referencing. You are being put into the "static" version of the bear hug. You are being allowed an ample amount of time to engage a technique. As for the ground fighting applications, if you get slammed into the ground - very, very good chance you will be knocked out or at the least a broken collar bone. 

My main point here is that there are some attacks that there are just no defense for. I think this is one of those attacks. Therefor, why spend the time training for something that won't happen they way they are being trained to deal with it.

But now if someone out there has found a viable technique..... I'm all ears.


----------



## Flatlander (Jun 11, 2004)

Are we assuming your arms locked in the bear hug, or free?  Assuming that the agressor has the strength to quickly pick you up, and the arms are locked in, and the agressor is already picking you up to throw you, I see only 2 options, neither is good.  Go for the "junk", and hope that a - you can, and b - it causes him to let go.  Or, thrash violently like you're having a seizure and hope that opens something up, or at least poses a control challenge.  Neither is pretty.

Is it worth it to train?  Yes.  You'll react more instinctively should this happen to you.  You'll remember what it's like to be grabbed.  It lessens the chance of you panicking, and keeping your head together.

Arms out of the bear hug opens many other possibilities.


----------



## kenpo_cory (Jun 11, 2004)

Also in a bear hug with your arms pinned, the groin is usually pretty easy to reach back and (insert attack here)


----------



## Flatlander (Jun 11, 2004)

Yes, I agree that if you insert a tack there that may be effective!
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





(I'm sorry guys, I had to.):rofl:


----------



## Zoran (Jun 12, 2004)

First off, there are some factors on *Real World* when it comes to a rear bear hug, pinned or not.

You are caught by surprise, _otherwise there would be no rear bear hug_, and unless you train to react when unprepared for any type of attack, there will be a delay to your reaction.   
The person grabbing you is usually much bigger and stronger. Anybody who tells you that doesn't make a difference is full of it.   
When someone does grab you, they are planning to do something besides just hold you there _(unless it's an idiot)_. This could be a tackle, pick you up and thow you, or pin you against something (car, wall etc.) 
 Working static techs is only a one part of your training. You should train for all possibilities. That includes working the what ifs and the spontaneous phases. Don't be fooled in believing you have a second or two. That measurement of time in a fight is an eternity. Of course, if you wish to believe that you have all your bases covered...well what ever helps you sleep at night.


----------



## Spud (Jun 12, 2004)

I agree with Disco and Zoran. The static bear hug is one thing and there is a variety of ways to counter it. But Im not seeing anyone address the dynamic bear hug takedown. You dont have a second or two. You opponent will likely be bigger and looking to drop you HARD.  

We did some bear hug drills a few weeks ago and nobody could consistently defend from a rear bear hug until a good 10-15 seconds when a groin kick finally connected or they could squirm enough to free an arm to go for eye gouge or groin strike. Head butting wasnt effective when the attacker had their face pressed into your shoulder blade. Brute strength and conditioning seemed to be the most effective just to allow you to washing machine yourself into a better defensive position. 

Again, situational awareness and prevention is the key.

Your mileage may vary


----------



## RCastillo (Jun 12, 2004)

Disco said:
			
		

> I know the Kenpo people had something similar in discussion a while back. But I'm looking for an overall opinion related to training defense against a rear bear hug. I have trained in the what I like to call "static" defense against the BH. Everything taught works. The problem arises from the practical aspect of someone putting you in a static bear hug. By static I mean you have ample time to shift, lower, etc. Everytime I have witnessed a bear hug done in aggression, and I can count the number of times on half a hand, it was never static. The person being bear hugged was picked up immediately and dumped hard. The fight was over at that point. There was no time to defend and no defense that I could/can think of for that situation. Kind of made all the training in BH defense a moot point.
> 
> Question is, what if any is the practical concept of still teaching people the static application defenses to a bear hug? Personally, I can't see any.......




Great Post!

 I do not forcus on a "static" practice if I can help it. I'm always working my people to go on the moment of first sensation. It might sound like my idea is impractical but you've pointed out very well that something bad is gonna happen.

Thanks for your reminder! :asian:


----------



## MJS (Jun 12, 2004)

Good thread!!  Rather than address each post seperate, I'll try to give a general over view.

First off, are we talking about arms free or pinned?? Front or rear?? This of course will make a difference in what you can/can't do.  Keep in mind, that there is the during and after phase of the bearhug.  During...as you feel the attackers hands around you, you may have time to pin your arms to your side.  After...self explanitory....hes already got you.  You really dont know what hes gonna do until after he grabs you....he could pick you up, drag you to the ground, etc.  One thing that you could do, is drop your weight.  It'll make it much harder for him to pick you up.  Of course, you have your hit to the back of the hand, headbutt, strikes to the groin, legs, stomps to the foot, etc.  I would think though, that the attacker is not gonna stand there...hes going to be doing something.

As for the ground and why you need to fight from there.  Well, IMO, everyone should have some knowledge of the ground.  In response to TigerWoman...No, you dont need to go to the ground, but keep in mind, that at that time that he grabs you, you are doing grappling, only its standing.  By not knowing what to do on the ground, could make a difference in the outcome, so to think that you will never get taken down, is foolish thinking.  If you've never trained with a grappler, I highly suggest it.  You're eyes will be open as to how quick you will be taken down, regardless of how good you think your stand up skills are.  Keep in mind, that a grappler trains for that ALL the time, and the take down happens faster than you think.  

I agree with Zorans post.  Static techs. are only a part of the process.  The techs. should be learned slow and then more resistance and aliveness added.  There will be a huge difference in the way you'll have to defend yourself.  

Chances are, you will be taken by surprsise.  But then again, the same can be said about a shirt grab.  Is the attacker going to stand there, or shove you into the wall??? Most likely it'll be the wall!!!  Will that text book SD move be able to be done???  Probably not, but thats why its important to train with that aliveness, to get the feeling of what it'll be like.  We can sit here all day and try to come uo with the "what ifs", but the fact remains that in the end, it'll come down to spontanious reacting at that given moment.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jun 12, 2004)

TigerWoman said:
			
		

> I don't understand "when someone bearhugs you and throws you to the ground, groundfighting skills must come into play".  When someone bearhugs me, I have a second or two to do some major damage that will avoid me being thrown too the ground."  In the event, I am thrown to the ground without me crunching his groin, headbutting him, or getting free and doing more damage, and he gets past me, yeah, I would have to use groundfighting techniques but there is no "MUST" since it doesn't have to happen IMO unless you are weak at above ground self defense and at striking.



We need to keep in mind though, that even if we get a shot off, we cant assume that its going to stop the attacker.  The idea of the one punch-one kill comes to mind here, and IMO, its a fantasy!!!!  

Mike


----------



## kenpo_cory (Jun 12, 2004)

flatlander said:
			
		

> Yes, I agree that if you insert a tack there that may be effective!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



hahahahahahah :rofl:


----------



## TigerWoman (Jun 12, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> \
> 
> As for the ground and why you need to fight from there.  Well, IMO, everyone should have some knowledge of the ground.  In response to TigerWoman...No, you dont need to go to the ground, but keep in mind, that at that time that he grabs you, you are doing grappling, only its standing.  By not knowing what to do on the ground, could make a difference in the outcome, so to think that you will never get taken down, is foolish thinking.  If you've never trained with a grappler, I highly suggest it.  You're eyes will be open as to how quick you will be taken down, regardless of how good you think your stand up skills are.  Keep in mind, that a grappler trains for that ALL the time, and the take down happens faster than you think.



That is assuming every attacker on street is a trained grappler.  Sure, if he is over my weight/mass and he is trained into an immediate takedown, he has the leverage in training and mass to take me down quickly. It would be hard to get off an accurate shot if I was being football tackled. But is this a real example of a mugger/rapist on the street?

I was talking on the street self-defense from a non-martial artist. And since he is not trained, may be nervous and not as adept with his body.  I am very aware of my surroundings, from past experience and am trained to be.  All, I'm saying is that, if someone were to get his hands around me, in that moment of awareness, I DO have a second or two to go for the groin, his head since I am average to tall height, and use whatever I can get free in the process. I would hardly use ONE shot. And we do train for the ground, a misconception about TKD people. (Not all TKD dojangs are alike)  Thanks for all your input. :asian:


----------



## Zoran (Jun 12, 2004)

TigerWoman said:
			
		

> I was talking on the street self-defense from a non-martial artist. And since he is not trained, may be nervous and not as adept with his body.


 That's a lot of assumptions. Un-trained street fighters have something more than most martial artists. It's called experience. Although I do admit women are usually attacked for different reasons than men, but keep in mind that they are trained through experience. Since they've probably done the same thing several times in their life. I prefer assuming and training for the worst, not hope for better circumstances.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 12, 2004)

flatlander said:
			
		

> Yes, I agree that if you insert a tack there that may be effective!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




 :roflmao: Love it love it love it.


----------



## 8253 (Jun 12, 2004)

continuoius arm movements usually can get you out of a lot of holds, but with bear hugs it has more to do with balance i think.  I have been in a few of them and i find that immediately bending forward hard and then putting all of your weight to one side, as if trying to fall on your side, usually brings them off balance and they loosen up to get a better grip.  Then you have a better chance of escaping to turn and fight.


----------



## Thesemindz (Jun 12, 2004)

I have been on both the giving and recieving ends of a bear hug. In my experience, if you train to lower your hips and weight and grapevine, as well as strike the groin, it is very difficult to throw or drag down someone with a bear hug. Not impossible, but I tried to take down a fifth degree Kenpo instructor with a bear hug in a very spontaneous environment two days ago and eventually had to abandon it and strike him instead. He lowered his stance and grabbed my testicles, that changed my mind in a hurry. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't. Obviously we all know there is no perfect answer. I like the bear hug, because it checks my opponents weapons. I usually only use it for a moment though, either to take my opponent down, or to move him to a disadvantageous position and then strike him. Another nice benefit of the bear hug is to transition into a rear naked choke if he forgets to pin your hands. I like the American Kenpo defenses. Of course they're practiced in a static environment, but the transition very smoothly into spontaneity.


-Rob


----------



## MJS (Jun 13, 2004)

TigerWoman said:
			
		

> That is assuming every attacker on street is a trained grappler.  Sure, if he is over my weight/mass and he is trained into an immediate takedown, he has the leverage in training and mass to take me down quickly. It would be hard to get off an accurate shot if I was being football tackled. But is this a real example of a mugger/rapist on the street?



If a man was intending to rape a woman, there is a chance that he could grab her and drag her to the ground.  Kids wrestle in play all the time, and I dont think that every child is a train grappler either.  The point I was making, along with everyone else is that if its something that you're not expecting, you could be on the ground before you know it.  Not saying that there is nothing that can't be done.  Sure, hits can be given, but like I said to think that one shot is going to do it, may not work.  Chance you could be in a bad position and not be able to get off another shot.  See, like I also said, this can go on and on and on.  



> I was talking on the street self-defense from a non-martial artist. And since he is not trained, may be nervous and not as adept with his body.  I am very aware of my surroundings, from past experience and am trained to be.  All, I'm saying is that, if someone were to get his hands around me, in that moment of awareness, I DO have a second or two to go for the groin, his head since I am average to tall height, and use whatever I can get free in the process. I would hardly use ONE shot. And we do train for the ground, a misconception about TKD people. (Not all TKD dojangs are alike)  Thanks for all your input. :asian:



Agreed! There is a split second.  IMO, the best way to train for this situation, is to do it on a regular basis, and keep the aliveness in it.  As for the ground....it is a misconception, because 9 times out of 10, you'll hear the stand up artist say, "Why train for the ground? I'll never end up there!"  If you and your school are doing it, I think that it great!!!    Its good to see people keep an open mind!  I addition to trained vs. non trained....I wouldnt under estimate your non trained as you're calling them.  If you're a criminal, chances are you've been around the block more than 1 time.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jun 13, 2004)

Zoran said:
			
		

> That's a lot of assumptions. Un-trained street fighters have something more than most martial artists. It's called experience. Although I do admit women are usually attacked for different reasons than men, but keep in mind that they are trained through experience. Since they've probably done the same thing several times in their life. I prefer assuming and training for the worst, not hope for better circumstances.



Good point Sir!! :asian:   The street is the best teacher, and there are many people out there that come from a rough life.  If they want to survive on a day to day basis, they need to learn to fight, and I highly doubt that your typical 'street punk' is going to enroll in the local MA school!  

Mike


----------



## Zoran (Jun 13, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Good point Sir!! :asian: The street is the best teacher, and there are many people out there that come from a rough life. If they want to survive on a day to day basis, they need to learn to fight, and I highly doubt that your typical 'street punk' is going to enroll in the local MA school!
> 
> Mike


 Yep. It can be seen in action when Tank first came on the UFC seen _(before the UFC became more sport orientated)_. His way of fighting was untrained and unconvential. Yet everybody had a real hard time with him.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 13, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Good point Sir!! :asian:   The street is the best teacher, and there are many people out there that come from a rough life.  If they want to survive on a day to day basis, they need to learn to fight, and I highly doubt that your typical 'street punk' is going to enroll in the local MA school!
> Mike



Perhaps, perhaps not. It depends upon the punk. People do move out and up from past environments. I know I have. So some folks do eventually reflect and consider taking a course in SD or get involved/enrolled in a MA school. 
While I'm not currently enrolled, were I to ever   degenerate back to a low-life criminal mind-set...I think I'd have an advantage how-ever slight, because of formal MA training that I received. 
It would be interesting to see the demographic or statistic of the number of people (in this country anyway) who have had some (if any) MA or SD training. Even if it was a 2 hour course in SD or were enrolled in a school long enough to get a couple of belts before dropping out for whatever reason, loss of interest, dissatisfaction, no money, whatever!
But yes, the street is the best educator for self defense, but not Martial Art(s). There's a big difference.


----------



## Shu2jack (Jun 13, 2004)

Well, unless the attacker is a lot bigger/stronger than you, couldn't you just simply make your body "dead weight" by dropping your body weight? I have had guys in class around my size and slightly bigger than me pick me up from a rear bear hug and try to pick me up and move me around or throw me. If they are strong enough they can drag me slowly, but they have a hard time because most people have a hard time throwing or ramming 170lbs of dead weight into a wall full force. When they start to pick you up and drag you, just drop everything down. If you time it right you can pull one of their back muscles.

I only mention this because it seems to be the best option when you are suddenly grabbed from behind and starting to be lifted and carried away and you have have very little or no effective options in the technique department or time. Of course, then the guy can just drop you on your *** and kick you when you are down, but at least my head wasn't slammed into the ground or I wasn't thrown through a window.

As for people from the street having an advantage over MAs. I think MAs have the advantage in techinque. My instructor always used to tell the beginners that he is not here to teach us how to kick and punch. A child can do that. He is here to teach us how to kick and punch effectivly and in such a way so we limit the injuries to ourselves by kicking and punching.

I believe people "from the street" have a mental advantage. They pick the spot to attack, they pick the time, they pick most of the conditions, they are the ones doing the surprizing, they have done street fights before so they are more relaxed when they are fighting, and if they are commiting a crime then they usually won't give a second thought to injuring or killing someone which in my mind deters a lot of MAs. If one person is trying to kill you and you are focused on not getting hurt or merly "disarming" or "detaining" him, then you are probably going to get hurt.


----------



## Ceicei (Jun 13, 2004)

Shu2jack said:
			
		

> I believe people "from the street" have a mental advantage. They pick the spot to attack, they pick the time, they pick most of the conditions, they are the ones doing the surprizing, they have done street fights before so they are more relaxed when they are fighting, and if they are commiting a crime then they usually won't give a second thought to injuring or killing someone which in my mind deters a lot of MAs. If one person is trying to kill you and you are focused on not getting hurt or merly "disarming" or "detaining" him, then you are probably going to get hurt.


Well said.  Thank you!

- Ceicei


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 14, 2004)

My thoughts: First of all "static defenses" don't work, since, as was pointed out earlier, there is no such thing as a static attack. "Alive" training is neccesary here.

Now, in order to defend this attack, you MUST have live grappling experience. It's a grappling attack and should be dealt with as such. Asking a striker to tell you how to defend that is like asking a judoka how to defend a jab-cross. 

In BJJ and greco-roman wrestling there is a strategy of "bearhugging" where you try to work yourself into a superior position. I myself have brought down guys twice my weight using underhooks, and i'm not even good. Not all "Bearhugs" are equal.


----------



## loki09789 (Jun 14, 2004)

I think the weakness isn't in the technique but how it is trained.  I know, I mean REALLY know, four bh defense and I can do them in my sleep, in the air, falling side ways as I might be in the process of falling or being thrown..... because I practiced them that way.

First they were 'static' because it was easy to learn and built confidence.  As I got better at them, the variations on how each BH position might be part of a more complex attack was set up for training - BH to set up a backwards throw, sideways throw, face plant (ouch, sucks), and if it were to set up a carry into another place/vehicle/room....

The techniques work in each of these cases.  Differently each time and in each scenario, but they still work.  Sometimes I can get the drop (bad pun) and lower my wt. before the tossing begins, sometimes not....

Ultimately the concept of Kenpo overskill applies.  Keep flowing with the technique.  A gouge to the eyes will hurt the bad guy regardless of whether I am flying through the air or not.  An ear pop will still get the job done.  It will still hurt when I land if the breakfall isn't there because I am busy, but at least I am reducing the chance of follow up attack.


----------



## MJS (Jun 14, 2004)

MACaver said:
			
		

> Perhaps, perhaps not. It depends upon the punk. People do move out and up from past environments. I know I have. So some folks do eventually reflect and consider taking a course in SD or get involved/enrolled in a MA school.
> While I'm not currently enrolled, were I to ever   degenerate back to a low-life criminal mind-set...I think I'd have an advantage how-ever slight, because of formal MA training that I received.
> It would be interesting to see the demographic or statistic of the number of people (in this country anyway) who have had some (if any) MA or SD training. Even if it was a 2 hour course in SD or were enrolled in a school long enough to get a couple of belts before dropping out for whatever reason, loss of interest, dissatisfaction, no money, whatever!
> But yes, the street is the best educator for self defense, but not Martial Art(s). There's a big difference.



I guess where I was going with this, was covered in your last statement.  When I made referrence to the street being your teacher, I was talking about just that...fighting on the street, where there are no rules and the potential for violence in *much* greater than in any MA school.  Sure, we can train for the reality of the street, but how many schools actually take it to that level.  Zoran made a very good point when he was talking about Tank and his fights in the UFC.  If you look at his very first fight in the UFC, he was pretty much billed as a street fighter.  He was destroying fighters that had a background in a traditional MA.  Granted, there were times when he lost, but he still put one hell of a beating on his opp.  He trained with some different guys, but if you look at how he fought compared to the other guys, you can see a big difference.

Mike


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Jun 14, 2004)

The problem of "static" self defense training isn't limited to bearhugs.  Name it:  Throat grabs, wrist grabs, hair pulls...when we train them we tend to do them at the lowest level of agression.  Your partner stands there, very agreeably grabs you (gently, even) and you practice the technique.  

That's fine...in the beginning.  Eventually the agression level has to go up, though.  When that happens the technique as taught might have to be modified, or a back up technique given.

Put it into sparring...along with the other stuff taught.  Have a "feeder" spar the defender, and aggressively feed the various scenario attacks.  I'd suggest the aggression level be brought up slowly.  The attacker here has to try and get into the midset of a "bad guy"...and not feed spin kicks and backfists.  

Regards,


Steve


----------



## rompida (Jun 14, 2004)

I guess before I chime in here.. I have a question.  I understand what you mean by the "aggessive" bearhug.  but, are we talking about a grab, then being thrown downward towards your shoulder?  

First, I'd say  - train your reflexes.  React before he "locks up" the BH.  You should have an automatic drop in center gravity when you feel someone wrapping around you.  If you can drop your @ss towards the ground, it will be easier for you to twist around and escape.  It will also be harder for him to lift you.

If he does get locked in.... you have fewer options if he's driving you forward with the intent to change the direction and drop you on your head/shoulder.  But, you still have options.  Chances are your attacker is right handed, and will drop you over his right side toward the ground.  So.....once he is locked in, grab his right arm and pull it TIGHTLY into your body.  This can be done whether he grabs you with arms free or not.  When he goes to dump you, pull down on the arm, causing his shoulder to drop. This will also cause you to tuck, protecting your head.  If he maintains control through the throw, it will cause him to go down with you.  Try it with someone and see if you can tweak it out.  When I wrestled in high school, this was a common thing to have happen.  

Bottom line... YES, its worth practicing.  If nothing else, just drill the reaction I mentioned first.  Feel the wrap up, drop weight.


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 14, 2004)

> I guess where I was going with this, was covered in your last statement. When I made referrence to the street being your teacher, I was talking about just that...fighting on the street, where there are no rules and the potential for violence in much greater than in any MA school. Sure, we can train for the reality of the street, but how many schools actually take it to that level. Zoran made a very good point when he was talking about Tank and his fights in the UFC. If you look at his very first fight in the UFC, he was pretty much billed as a street fighter. He was destroying fighters that had a background in a traditional MA. Granted, there were times when he lost, but he still put one hell of a beating on his opp. He trained with some different guys, but if you look at how he fought compared to the other guys, you can see a big difference.



Tank sucks. He has never fought a top guy and won. All his wins have been against guys who know little to nothing about MMA. When put up against a skilled grappler in his weight class, he lost in 45 seconds.



> I think the weakness isn't in the technique but how it is trained. I know, I mean REALLY know, four bh defense and I can do them in my sleep, in the air, falling side ways as I might be in the process of falling or being thrown..... because I practiced them that way.
> 
> First they were 'static' because it was easy to learn and built confidence. As I got better at them, the variations on how each BH position might be part of a more complex attack was set up for training - BH to set up a backwards throw, sideways throw, face plant (ouch, sucks), and if it were to set up a carry into another place/vehicle/room....



Your attacker might be adding different variations but it can still be static. The difference between static and alive is wether the attacker is attacking you full force or not.



> Ultimately the concept of Kenpo overskill applies. Keep flowing with the technique. A gouge to the eyes will hurt the bad guy regardless of whether I am flying through the air or not.



Will it really? When grabbed from behind? I submit to you that eye gouges are vastly overrated. Not useless, just not the panacea they're advertised as.



> An ear pop will still get the job done.



And *this* I have never seen work on a noncompliant opponent.


----------



## Thesemindz (Jun 14, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> (in reference to ear boxing) And *this* I have never seen work on a noncompliant opponent.



Just for the record, I dropped a guy with a double ear box and he fell to the ground crying and clutching the sides of his head. He was a "noncompliant opponent." 


-Rob


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 14, 2004)

Pics?


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Jun 14, 2004)

rompida said:
			
		

> I guess before I chime in here.. I have a question.  I understand what you mean by the "aggessive" bearhug.  but, are we talking about a grab, then being thrown downward towards your shoulder?



Sure.  Or he's picking you up and moving you.  Or whatever.  You anticipate how it might come off, and train it accordingly with increasing force and non-compliance on the part of the attacker.



> Just for the record, I dropped a guy with a double ear box and he fell to the ground crying and clutching the sides of his head. He was a "noncompliant opponent."



And I hit a guy with one, brusing his left eardrum and breaking his right one.  It angered him greatly...and that was about it.  He was a musician, and was very, very upset.  

I felt just terrible.  Really.  I did.



> I submit to you that eye gouges are vastly overrated. Not useless, just not the panacea they're advertised as.



Stating it is "vastly overrated" might be vastly underrating a technique that will, if pulled off, cause instant shock and incapacitation.  It requires no significant strength and can be done by a small woman against a very large man.

There is a reason these shots are not allowed in the UFC and elsewhere.  It causes permanent disfiguring and incapacitating damage and excruciating pain.  You pull it off and your opponent is pretty much done for the day.  I supose he could do an "eyelid block" or a "power blink" or something.  

Let me know if anyone perfects those counters.


Regards,


Steve


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 14, 2004)

> Stating it is "vastly overrated" might be vastly underrating a technique that will, if pulled off, cause instant shock and incapacitation. It requires no significant strength and can be done by a small woman against a very large man.


 I'm not saying it's useless. What I am saying is: 

 1: It's not useful from an inferior position, like under mount or attacked from  behind. See the challenge match videos on bullshido

 2: It's not useful if it's trained only on a compliant partner.



> There is a reason these shots are not allowed in the UFC and elsewhere. It causes permanent disfiguring and incapacitating damage and excruciating pain.


 There are vale tudo events that allow these shots. There are vale tudo events that allow everything. They look like other vale tudo. 
 And it's all legal in the gracie challenge. In fact there's one match where rorion faces off against a "modern hapkido" instructor who states before hand that he'd just gouge rorion's eyes. Rorion chokes him out. Thrice.


  You pull it off and your opponent is pretty much done for the day. I supose he could do an "eyelid block" or a "power blink" or something. 

 Let me know if anyone perfects those counters.


 Regards,


 Steve[/QUOTE]


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Jun 14, 2004)

> 1: It's not useful from an inferior position, like under mount or attacked from  behind. See the challenge match videos on bullshido.



This is a self defense thread.  It isn't a "challenge match" thread.  We're not talking about Rorion Gracie versus a "Modern Hapkido Instructor" or a Vale Tudo event.  

I don't know how YOU plan for self defense...or who you plan on teaching.   

I'm teaching soccer moms and college students who major in music.  I'm teaching teenage girls. I'm teaching grandmothers with arthritis.  I'm not training them to fight Rorion Gracie, Tank Abbott or an MMA fighter.  They're not going to be bearhugged and suplexed and mounted and then submitted with a "juji".

And I disagree... eye gouges can be effective from inferior positions.  One can work them into an attack from behind (by turning into the attacker).  One can apply them when mounted and from bottom side control and from bottom while held in a kesa.  Maybe one can't do them to Rorion or to Erik Paulson...but that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of the thread.  These aren't going to be the guys attacking the average martial art student.



> 2: It's not useful if it's trained only on a compliant partner.



If you check my original post, you'll see I agree with that concept.  During an installation phase your partner is compliant...you upscale the intensity after that.  At some point it has to be contested.


Regards,


Steve


----------



## MJS (Jun 14, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> Tank sucks. He has never fought a top guy and won. All his wins have been against guys who know little to nothing about MMA. When put up against a skilled grappler in his weight class, he lost in 45 seconds.



Well, we all have our opinions right.  I never said that he was the best fighter out there, but simply that regardless of win/lose, he still pounded away at the majority of the guys hes fought.  In addition, we were not talking about his UFC matches, we were using him as a comparison to a street brawler compared to your average martial artist.  





> Your attacker might be adding different variations but it can still be static. The difference between static and alive is wether the attacker is attacking you full force or not.



Well, I would think that if someone was attacking you, that it would be with force.  The difference that we're using here with static vs. alive is if your 'attacker'  is just standing there while you hit him 10 times, or if hes giving you the resistance that you'll most likely find on the street!!!





> Will it really? When grabbed from behind? I submit to you that eye gouges are vastly overrated. Not useless, just not the panacea they're advertised as.



Have you ever been poked in the eye?? Have you ever had something in your eye like an eyelash or sand?? I have and I can assure you that an eye jab does have an effect and is not as over rated as you think.  





> And *this* I have never seen work on a noncompliant opponent.



Like the eye jab, a hit to the ear will get some results.

Mike


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 15, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> This is a self defense thread. It isn't a "challenge match" thread. We're not talking about Rorion Gracie versus a "Modern Hapkido Instructor" or a Vale Tudo event.


 Right, but i'm trying to cite examples of the the technique's attempted use. We can trade anecdotal stories all night, but that won't get us anywhere. Sure Rorion is a lot more skilled than the average man, but then again, so was the guy he fought.



> I don't know how YOU plan for self defense...or who you plan on teaching.
> 
> I'm teaching soccer moms and college students who major in music. I'm teaching teenage girls. I'm teaching grandmothers with arthritis. I'm not training them to fight Rorion Gracie, Tank Abbott or an MMA fighter. They're not going to be bearhugged and suplexed and mounted and then submitted with a "juji".


 Yes. However if you can survive that then you can survive an untrained bearhug.



> And I disagree... eye gouges can be effective from inferior positions. One can work them into an attack from behind (by turning into the attacker).


 By which point he's no longer behind you, is he?



> One can apply them when mounted and from bottom side control and from bottom while held in a kesa. Maybe one can't do them to Rorion or to Erik Paulson...but that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of the thread. These aren't going to be the guys attacking the average martial art student.


 Look, I get your point. But the only imperical evidence we have of these techniques being attempted is challenge matches and vale tudo events, so that's what i'm going by, unless you have footage of attempted rapes.




> If you check my original post, you'll see I agree with that concept. During an installation phase your partner is compliant...you upscale the intensity after that. At some point it has to be contested.


 Yes. I prefer about fifteen minutes after the technique has been introduced.


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 15, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Well, we all have our opinions right. I never said that he was the best fighter out there, but simply that regardless of win/lose, he still pounded away at the majority of the guys hes fought. In addition, we were not talking about his UFC matches, we were using him as a comparison to a street brawler compared to your average martial artist.


 In that case we can conclude that your average "street brawler" sucks.



> Well, I would think that if someone was attacking you, that it would be with force. The difference that we're using here with static vs. alive is if your 'attacker' is just standing there while you hit him 10 times, or if hes giving you the resistance that you'll most likely find on the street!!!


 Exactly.



> Have you ever been poked in the eye?? Have you ever had something in your eye like an eyelash or sand?? I have and I can assure you that an eye jab does have an effect and is not as over rated as you think.


 Yes. Yes.







> Like the eye jab, a hit to the ear will get some results.
> 
> Mike


 We don't really have any evidence for that either way. STRIKING the ear area surely isn't bad but I doubt the effectiveness of the ear drum cup smack thing.


----------



## Zoran (Jun 15, 2004)

I find it interesting that people always start arguing the merits of a *one* strike, or the merits of training *one* way compared to another. One should never train only *one* way nor should they defend themselves with *one* strike.

   Would you go to a gun fight with *one* bullet? Of course not, nor would I only rely on an eye poke, ear box, or what ever else *alone*.

   What it comes down to, is static training is a good way to learn a new technique as well as it's good for beginners to get their foundation. What should eventually follow is passive resistance - resistance - to an opponent that is actively aggressive. 

   It's my educated opinion. Agreeing with me is optional.:deadhorse


----------



## Sigung86 (Jun 15, 2004)

Some of this discussion shows how limited training is for some folks.  No offense intended.  I admit to coming from a pretty strong/strict Kenpo background.  The techniques I've learned will work as advertised, if they are taken from the static posture to the "full bore" posture and worked with.

Training is only training if you don't work with it.

Dan


----------



## SenseiGR (Jun 15, 2004)

I take it your hands are free?  Grab the head with one hand, making it just about impossible for the attacker to throw you.  The other hand is free to poke eyes, twist hair, etc.


----------



## MJS (Jun 15, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> In that case we can conclude that your average "street brawler" sucks.



So you're basing a judgement of *ALL* street fighters on Tank???  Come on man, he's just one example.  Mike Tyson grew up on the streets.  Would you say he sucked??




> We don't really have any evidence for that either way. STRIKING the ear area surely isn't bad but I doubt the effectiveness of the ear drum cup smack thing.



Did a little search online and came up with this.  Not sure where it happened, obviously not in the States, but I thought it was interesting.



> A Police inspector has been ordered to pay a compensation of Rs 35,000, plus six per cent interest from the date the case was filed, to a man whose hearing he damaged with a slap.
> 
> Almost 10 years after Inspector Jaiprakash Bodhankar slapped Virar resident Jagannath Patil, the Vasai court on Friday ordered Bodhankar to pay the amount to Patil as relief for permanent damage to his left eardrum.
> 
> ...



In addition, if you look at Ed Parkers book 4 from the Infinite Insights Into Kenpo, he lists parts of the body, the strikes that are best suited for those areas, and the results of such strikes.  

Hitting the ears-  Strikes that can be used

1-inner palm
2-heel of palm
3-back fist
4-hammer fist
5-handsword

Result or Effect

1-pain
2-headache
3-muffled hearing
4-*rupture of the eardrum*

Gee, sounds to me like its possible and that you can get results.

Mike


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Jun 15, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> By which point he's no longer behind you, is he?



We hold these truths to be self-evident.  This was my point.  The approach and the connection might be from any angle.  You adapt to it and get the eye shot.  In opening this thread nobody indicated that you HAD to keep your back to the perp as part of the self defense technique.  You said an eye gouge doesn't work if the attacker comes from behind...sure it does.  You turn into him and take that puppy out of his gourd.  

If properly dessicated it makes an interesting tree ornament at Christmas.  You can also hang it from your rear view mirror or give it to your daughter as a somewhat unique charm bracelet.  It makes a zippy hackey sack, too.



			
				hedgehogey said:
			
		

> Look, I get your point. But the only imperical evidence we have of these techniques being attempted is challenge matches and vale tudo events, so that's what i'm going by, unless you have footage of attempted rapes..



 Highly trained fighters using techniques on highly trained fighters?  This won't lead to us teaching the latest "rage" technique or training method?  When Pedro Rizzo sidesteps a fighter and knocks him out with a beautiful right cross, we then laud its efficacy and start teaching it as a viable method of self defense for women and teens?

Those fights provide empirical data for YOU to use in your applications, perhaps.  I'm taking a guess here that you're young, male, fit, and probably very much in the game...which is fine.   One might ask how you got into a "self defense" situation in the first place if you are indeed in such prime condition.  Perps attack those they perceive to be weak, typically.  

If you want empirical data concerning sexual assault, you'll have to look elsewhere.  Try talking to victims or reading accounts of attacks.  There IS video footage out there of an eleven year old girl getting approached by the guy who killed and molested her...but it does little more than point out the subtle ways that predators work.

I note that the MMA section of this forum is DEAD.  Wouldn't it be better to take Tank, Pedro, and Rorion over there and let them fight it out?



			
				hedgehogey said:
			
		

> Yes. I prefer about fifteen minutes after the technique has been introduced.



No problem with that.

---------

Zoran, in discussing eye gouges we're discussing "a strike", not "one strike".  I for one never advocate going for the one shot stop. Anything but.

I take that back...the Five Point Exploding Heart Palm.  If a skinny woman can drop the great Kwai Chang with it, then I'd rely on it exclusively.  

I haven't mastered it yet, though.  So far I've irritated several people.  I find this frustrating.

---------

MJS...the effects of an ear shot that you list...ruptured ear drum, pain, muffled hearing, and dizziness are all symptoms that were experienced by the guy whose ears I boxed.  Note again that it didn't stop him.  It ticked him off.  He didn't drop screaming to the ground.  Had he the ability I think he would have kicked my butt.  He didn't have the ability so he demurred.  

Note that this guy was a major Poindexter (academic, musician, dweeby) and not the austere raging sociopath that haunts our deepest nightmares. 

It is not uncommon for Navy SEALS to rupture their eardrums on exit from subs at depth.  They go on with the mission.  It hurts.  It isn't incapacitating to any degree if the person afflicted has any measure of pain tolerance.  Doctors gently suck out debris and fluid, put cotton over the ear with instructions to keep it dry, prescribe over the counter pain medications such as Tylenol as treatment, and suggest follow up to an otolaryngologist.

I teach this technique, but with the noted caveats.


Regards,


Steve


----------



## MJS (Jun 15, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> Will it really? When grabbed from behind? I submit to you that eye gouges are vastly overrated. Not useless, just not the panacea they're advertised as.



Obviously, depending on how you're grabbed, that will determine your best strikes.  However, regarding the eye shots, heres another quote from Parkers book 4 regarding eye shots.

suggested weapons-

1-finger thrusts (all methods)
2-various finger claws and hooks

result or effect-

1- rupture
2-infection
3-temp. or perm. loss of sight
4-poss. loss of eyeball

Again, I wouldnt say that they are over-rated.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jun 15, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> Zoran, in discussing eye gouges we're discussing "a strike", not "one strike".  I for one never advocate going for the one shot stop. Anything but.
> 
> I take that back...the Five Point Exploding Heart Palm.  If a skinny woman can drop the great Kwai Chang with it, then I'd rely on it exclusively.
> 
> ...



Steve-  You said it best above.  I too, have * never * said that the one shot one kill method was anything more than a fantasy.  If you read back a few posts, you'll see where I said that.  However, regardless of if it stopped him for good, the fact of the matter is, is that is stopped him momentarily!  And that is the key!  Many times, those small shots are enough to give the guy something to think about.....while at the same time, you continue to strike!!!  If you do that eye jab, and he reacts to it, it'll buy you time to A) run, B) continue to strike!!!  Personally, I dont care how big the guy is, there is no conditioning method for the groin, eyes and ears.  




> It is not uncommon for Navy SEALS to rupture their eardrums on exit from subs at depth.  They go on with the mission.  It hurts.  It isn't incapacitating to any degree if the person afflicted has any measure of pain tolerance.  Doctors gently suck out debris and fluid, put cotton over the ear with instructions to keep it dry, prescribe over the counter pain medications such as Tylenol as treatment, and suggest follow up to an otolaryngologist.



Good point!!  The same can be said of scuba diving too.  Sure, the adrenal rush is going to play a part, but we're all human here, not Supermen.  Again, its the little things that matter.  We keep hearing about the UFC.  OK, heres an example.  Marco Ruas and Paul Varleans.  Marco chopped at Pauls legs over and over, in addition to stomping on his foot.  What was the result?? Paul fell like a tree due to the wearing down on his legs.  Marco mounted and finished the fight.  The point of this?  Paul didnt fall with one shot to his leg, but started to feel the effects after a few of them.  The adrenaline, I'm sure was flowing.

Mike


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 15, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> So you're basing a judgement of *ALL* street fighters on Tank??? Come on man, he's just one example. Mike Tyson grew up on the streets. Would you say he sucked??


Hey, I was just replying to the guy who said that he was using tank as an example of a "street brawler".





> Did a little search online and came up with this. Not sure where it happened, obviously not in the States, but I thought it was interesting.


It's certainly interesting, but it's low on details. It appears te victim was taken by surprise, we don't  know if the victim was resisting, and we don't know if it was a cupped slap that caused the damage or a strike.




> In addition, if you look at Ed Parkers book 4 from the Infinite Insights Into Kenpo, he lists parts of the body, the strikes that are best suited for those areas, and the results of such strikes.
> 
> Hitting the ears- Strikes that can be used
> 
> ...


Honestly, I couldn't care less.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Jun 15, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Steve- OK, heres an example.  Marco Ruas and Paul Varleans.  Marco chopped at Pauls legs over and over, in addition to stomping on his foot.  What was the result?? Paul fell like a tree due to the wearing down on his legs.  Marco mounted and finished the fight.  The point of this?  Paul didnt fall with one shot to his leg, but started to feel the effects after a few of them.  The adrenaline, I'm sure was flowing.
> 
> Mike



That was perhaps one of the BEST fights I've ever seen.  

It took around 23 kicks to that leg to drop Varlens.  I think that's what I counted.  


Regards,


Steve


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 15, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> We hold these truths to be self-evident. This was my point. The approach and the connection might be from any angle. You adapt to it and get the eye shot. In opening this thread nobody indicated that you HAD to keep your back to the perp as part of the self defense technique. You said an eye gouge doesn't work if the attacker comes from behind...sure it does. You turn into him and take that puppy out of his gourd.


I meant it doesn't work if he's behind you. 



> Highly trained fighters using techniques on highly trained fighters? This won't lead to us teaching the latest "rage" technique or training method? When Pedro Rizzo sidesteps a fighter and knocks him out with a beautiful right cross, we then laud its efficacy and start teaching it as a viable method of self defense for women and teens?


Women are not going to have much arm strength naturally, so I wouldn't suggest boxing unless they build the upper body some.
Sidestepping, slipping, etc. however, are still the best punch defenses we know.



> Those fights provide empirical data for YOU to use in your applications, perhaps. I'm taking a guess here that you're young, male, fit, and probably very much in the game...which is fine. One might ask how you got into a "self defense" situation in the first place if you are indeed in such prime condition. Perps attack those they perceive to be weak, typically.


I'm young and fit, but not naturally athletic or muscular. What little athleticism I have comes from training.
HOWEVER many times "self defense" instructors will advocate women using techniques that strong MMAists know are suicide even for someone as fit as they are! 
If a 250 pound roid machine can't use a technique, a 100 pound woman certainly can't.



> If you want empirical data concerning sexual assault, you'll have to look elsewhere. Try talking to victims or reading accounts of attacks. There IS video footage out there of an eleven year old girl getting approached by the guy who killed and molested her...but it does little more than point out the subtle ways that predators work.


I have, and there's a real dearth of information on succesfully used techniques. Also, memory distorts things, especially traumatic memory.

I do have a clip of a man assaulting a woman. He immediately throws her to the ground and stomps her many times.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Jun 15, 2004)

The clip you mention of the woman being thrown to the ground and stomped...I've seen it, if its the one from Russia...I think it was Russia.  It is one of the most brutal things I've ever seen.  I believe he killed her.  If she survived, I'd be surprised.

Not for the weak of heart, that clip.


Regards,


Steve


----------



## Gaston (Jun 15, 2004)

*Just a few photos to illustrate the Bear Hugs - Practical or Impractical question Photos from the Pancrase 10th Anniversary, August 31, 2003*

*By BJJ.Org Featured Contributor Susumu Nagao.
Page originally from Susumu Nagao's *

(Look at the corner man in the 2nd photo)


----------



## MJS (Jun 15, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> Hey, I was just replying to the guy who said that he was using tank as an example of a "street brawler".



Yup, and I was just replying to the guy who pretty much made a blanket statement that ALL street brawlers suck.  Again, the topic is not about the UFC or what fights Tank lost/won, but instead to show that he was a guy that came into the ring with no MA background and gave a beating to many fighters.  Sure, he may have lost, but many of those winners, looked pretty beat to me.






> It's certainly interesting, but it's low on details. It appears te victim was taken by surprise, we don't  know if the victim was resisting, and we don't know if it was a cupped slap that caused the damage or a strike.



Regardless of if hes resisting, the fact remains that the slap caused damage to the ear.  





> Honestly, I couldn't care less.



Yeah, I figured as much.  

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jun 15, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> The clip you mention of the woman being thrown to the ground and stomped...I've seen it, if its the one from Russia...I think it was Russia.  It is one of the most brutal things I've ever seen.  I believe he killed her.  If she survived, I'd be surprised.
> 
> Not for the weak of heart, that clip.
> 
> ...



Yes, I have seen the same clip and I think you're right on the location.  She was overwhlemed in seconds and I too would be surprised if she survived that.

Mike


----------



## hedgehogey (Jun 16, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Yup, and I was just replying to the guy who pretty much made a blanket statement that ALL street brawlers suck. Again, the topic is not about the UFC or what fights Tank lost/won, but instead to show that he was a guy that came into the ring with no MA background and gave a beating to many fighters. Sure, he may have lost, but many of those winners, looked pretty beat to me.


For sure, but tank has never beaten anyone good.




> Regardless of if hes resisting, the fact remains that the slap caused damage to the ear.


Oh I don't doubt that. It's wether it works on a person fighting back that I doubt.


----------



## MJS (Jun 16, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> For sure, but tank has never beaten anyone good.



You're right, though he's come close.  I think he would have had Don Frye if he didnt fall.  





> Oh I don't doubt that. It's wether it works on a person fighting back that I doubt.



Saying that makes it sound as if you're saying that ANY tech. done on a resisting opp. won't work.  If you're doing a tech. against a punch, you make it sound that unless the person just stands there, the tech. is usless once he starts fighting back.  Maybe I'm reading wrong, but thats the way it sounds to me.  Could you clarify that statement for me???  In addition, could you give us some examples of how you would defend the bearhug??  What do you think works best/least, and why???  I'm interested in hearing your reply!

Mike


----------



## loki09789 (Jun 16, 2004)

MJS,

I am not sure since I haven't really followed up on this thread in a while, but I was wondering you had made a comment about "live training" in relation to the bearhug stuff.


----------



## MJS (Jun 16, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> MJS,
> 
> I am not sure since I haven't really followed up on this thread in a while, but I was wondering you had made a comment about "live training" in relation to the bearhug stuff.



Yes Sir I have.  Post #19.  I talk about that often because IMO its something that is very important and is something that is often overlooked.  I try to apply that everytime I train.  Even in my BJJ class.  We'll cover a tech. such as an armbar.  We start off doing it slow and then gradually add speed and resistance.  It certainly makes a big difference.  

Mike


----------



## loki09789 (Jun 16, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Yes Sir I have. Post #19. I talk about that often because IMO its something that is very important and is something that is often overlooked. I try to apply that everytime I train. Even in my BJJ class. We'll cover a tech. such as an armbar. We start off doing it slow and then gradually add speed and resistance. It certainly makes a big difference.
> 
> Mike


It is worth mentioning and doing on a regular basis.  Gets you as close to real as you can reasonably get.  I think without that type of component, it is near impossible to give students a chance to test adaptivity of techniques, creativity and tactical sense.


----------



## MJS (Jun 16, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> It is worth mentioning and doing on a regular basis.  Gets you as close to real as you can reasonably get.  I think without that type of component, it is near impossible to give students a chance to test adaptivity of techniques, creativity and tactical sense.



Very true!  Granted, you may never be prepared for every situation, but at least by training real, you may stand a better chance.

Mike


----------



## hkg (Jul 31, 2004)

Question is, what if any is the practical concept of still teaching people the static application defenses to a bear hug? Personally, I can't see any.......[/QUOTE]



Well for starters i would do my best not to get caught in a bear hug but if i did i would jst crazily kick, headbut even bite if there were other attackers around and i needed to be free quickly.


----------



## hedgehogey (Jul 31, 2004)

> Well for starters i would do my best not to get caught in a bear hug but if i did i would jst crazily kick, headbut even bite if there were other attackers around and i needed to be free quickly.


You're in for a rude awakening. 



> Saying that makes it sound as if you're saying that ANY tech. done on a resisting opp. won't work.


No, there are techniques that work on resisting opponents and techs that don't. That is the BASIS of effectiveness. If it does not work on a resisting opponent in training, it will not work when you're really attacked.



> If you're doing a tech. against a punch, you make it sound that unless the person just stands there, the tech. is usless once he starts fighting back.


That depends entirely on the defense. If you're slipping a jab, that's an effective tech that can be worked immediately with resistance. If you're knife handing the attacking arm.



> Maybe I'm reading wrong, but thats the way it sounds to me. Could you clarify that statement for me??? In addition, could you give us some examples of how you would defend the bearhug??


Well first of all, a "bearhug", as a grappler is probably what I would be putting my opponent in. With underhooks I can amplify my strength and deny him leverage. If I were underhooked, I would pummel my arms inside. Not all "bearhugs" are equal. Some give a big advantage, others none at all.


----------



## RCastillo (Jul 31, 2004)

I think all situations need to be addressed. If not, we're not doing a good job as Instructors. :asian:


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Aug 1, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> No, there are techniques that work on resisting opponents and techs that don't. That is the BASIS of effectiveness. If it does not work on a resisting opponent in training, it will not work when you're really attacked.





With this caveat, perhaps:  Not all techniques work all the time against everyone.

If we follow the above maxim that it has to work against a resisting opponent, then a technique with one percent effectiveness would qualify for admission to our bag of tricks.  We all have anecdotes of a person who pulled off the most improbable technique and gotten away with it.  


Regards,


Steve


----------



## hkg (Aug 1, 2004)

hedgehogey said:
			
		

> You're in for a rude awakening.
> 
> I take ur point that i may be and i havnt been in that situation before but what would u say is the most effective way of dealin with it in general?


----------



## Andrew Green (Aug 1, 2004)

Ok, I didn't read everything in here so bare with me 

A rear bare hug - Being caught in one means you are in trouble.

First and foremost you have to keep yourself on the ground, preferably going right to the ground.

There is a basic throw where you drop and twist and bring your opponent down.

You can also look for a knee bar.

Pushing his hands down and trying to break the grip can work as well.

But the key thing is staying on the ground, either by going right to the ground or breaking his posture so he can't lift you. 

Don't bother trying groin grabs cause you'll already be air bourne.  Headbutts won't work if he is positioned right, nor elbows or any kind of strike.  He has the advantage.

I've also seen grabbing the leg and using your butt as a folcrum to take him down.  This is a good basic technique but it is easily countered by someone that knows what they are doing, all they got to do is hop in and under you and throw you over top of them.

It also depends on what kind of grip they have, they should have a C grip.  If they are just grabbing a wrist you can stripe there grip fairly easily.

If you are getting lifted hook there legs with yours so they can't get much height on you, hopefully you'll end up on your feet, or with both falling and going to a scramble for position on the ground.

A good source would be western wrestling, a rear bodylock is a a strong position to get and defences and attacks should be covered in any video.

Remember that there are other things which will work on someone doing it improperly / poorly.  These are good if that happens.  But personally I'd prefer to overestimate then underestimate.  Assume they know what they are doing and if it turns out they don't it just makes it that much easier.


----------



## hedgehogey (Aug 1, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> With this caveat, perhaps: Not all techniques work all the time against everyone.
> 
> If we follow the above maxim that it has to work against a resisting opponent, then a technique with one percent effectiveness would qualify for admission to our bag of tricks. We all have anecdotes of a person who pulled off the most improbable technique and gotten away with it.


I mean working every day on a resisting oponent in training. Anecdotes mean nothing.


----------



## Disco (Aug 1, 2004)

I have let this thread run for awhile, so everybody can input. The photo's that Gaston listed (Thank you), actually say all there is to say. The second set shows trained fighters, in great shape, aware of whats going on, getting dumped on his head. Imagine that being done on the street (concrete - asphalt). Even giving the benefit of the doubt, that the fighter being dumped, allowed himself to go with the slam because the ring floor had some give to it, he was still taking a big chance on not being hurt or knocked out. Perhaps that was why there was no attempt to defend against what was happening, or in reality in that position there is no defense. Many who have taken the time to review and add their opinions, seem to be missing the point of this thread entirely, or perhaps it was because I didn't explain it enough. The object of discussion was a rear bear hug, done with hostile intentions. Front bear hugs have available defenses. Being grabbed from behind and slammed to the ground in less than 1.5 seconds (we actually stop watched it), left no viable reaction time. Granted, if the attacker stumbles with the technique, a window of opportunity does present itself, but it's very slight. The question was presented for a two fold reason. 1) How often does this bear hug come into play in real self defense actions? 2) And if and when it does, is there a real defense for the way the attack has been outlined? This is very simple and straight forward. Dosen't matter if arms are pinned or not. There are no variables involved. 

Thanks to everybody who has already posted and to those that will post.  :asian: 

PS: Does anyone know what happened to the fighter that was slammed in the picture?


----------

