# Self-Defense???



## Danny T (Mar 4, 2015)

There numerous threads concerning self-defense with most all on fighting, fighting back, and/or about one system being better vs some other system. 
But what is self-defense? Is it fighting or is it much more? Most all MA schools, gyms...etc claim to teach self-defense; do they?
What is self-defense???


----------



## Shai Hulud (Mar 4, 2015)

I like to treat the term as self-explanatory, but I may be too banal about it. 

I personally define "Self-Defense" as a brand of fighting where the immediate concern is your own safety - namely, the removal of your person from imminent/potential/immediate harm. It isn't necessarily fighting though either. In an ideal world, self-defense classes would give you pointers and tips so that you can protect yourself at all times without having to recourse to fighting. That would be the last resort.

Just my 2C.


----------



## S33KR (Mar 4, 2015)

Agreeing with you, I feel like self defense is the window of time where you've been attacked and you respond with everything you've got (so to speak). Maybe it works, or maybe the encounter is prolonged and you have to move into using combinations and a bit of strategy. Hopefully none of us will never experience it.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Mar 4, 2015)

Self defense is anything and everything you do to protect yourself. Anything from washing your hands or wearing your seat belt to situational awareness, conflict avoidance, learning defensive tactics and techniques...


----------



## Paul_D (Mar 4, 2015)

My definition...

Most clubs don't teach SD no, they just put that on their website to get more people through the door.  Martial arts, fighting and self defence are three _different _things.  Learning martial arts to learn self defence is like taking tennis lessons to learn how to fly a plane.

When you teach your children to cross the road you don't tell them to step out into the road without looking and instead teach them to do a stuntman roll over the bonnet (or hood I think you call it in America?) of the car.  Instead you teach them the skills to avoid being run over in the first place.

For me Self Defence is about the skills you need to avoid a getting into a situation, or allowing one to escalate (if you can't avoid getting into it) before it gets to the point when violence starts.  Once violence starts then your self defence has failed, you are now fighting.

Successful SD skills therefore are the ones that allow you to avoid getting violent, rather than the skills which allow you to "win" once violence starts, those are fighting skills, and fighting and self defence are not the same thing.

Also, as I stated yesterday in a different thread, men always talk about fighting when they mention SD, ignoring the fact that for the majority of people a "fight" isn't what they most need to worry about, so what is the point of making the focus of your SD training something which you will most likely never encounter.  Sending your Granny to the local MMA gym is as pointless as it is necessary as that isn't the sort of attack she need to worry about.

Old people, middle aged people, sexual atatcks, women attacked by ex partners, young teens having their phones or bikes stolen, people mugged at cash machines etc don't get into into "fights" because casual criminal don't want "fights" they want easy victims, so the focus of most peoples SD training should centre on Threat Awareness & Evaluation and Target Hardening skills.

I am fully aware of course that this isn't the definition most others have  (and wasn't the one I had until a few years ago), but it';s the one I have now, which usually leads to confusion and much discussion/explanation in threads lol


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 4, 2015)

Rather than do a whole bunch of typing, I'm just going to quote something I posted a year ago on the relationship of self-defense, fighting, and the martial arts:



Tony Dismukes said:


> *Fighting *- covers any situation where two or more people are trying to violently defeat each other. This can occur in a sportive or a street context. The combatants may be armed or unarmed. They may be operating under different sets of rules (even in a non-sportive context). Just a few examples of a fight might be: a MMA bout between two pro fighters, three cops subduing a resisting suspect, a pair of drunks squaring up outside a bar over some verbal offense. Many, many more situations are possible. These different contexts significantly affect what tactics, principles, and techniques are most effective in winning the fight. Nevertheless, there is significant overlap in what works as well.
> 
> Not all violent situations are fights. A canny asocial predator will attempt to use surprise, intimidation, or overwhelming force to ensure that there is no fight - that all the violence is directed towards his victim with no resistance.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mephisto (Mar 4, 2015)

i think someone explained it best earlier, self defense has "soft" components; situational awareness, deescalation, and even legal aspects one should be aware of. Each of these soft areas of self defense could involve and number of experts that have no experience or knowledge of fighting. A discussion on these topics could easily take up a lot of time and is a class in and of itself.

That being said the other side of self defense are the physical components. I think in a classical sense "self defense" refers to the physical components of protecting ones self when being attacked. This is based on the realization that soft techniques will not stop every assault. Plenty of us have been in fights or known someone who has, at such a point soft techniques have failed and knowledge of physical techniques are the only option. Physical techniques with SD in mind can and should be trained with the goal to get away. However, you can't always flee and sometimes you must break an attackers will to continue with the attack. Many would refer to this as fighting, that's fine but the need may arise to physically defend yourself. Fighting and being familiar with a fight are crucial to such a situation.

Each area is a specialty and a specialist should be sought out when learning self defense. A few situational drills and screaming and yelling in the dojo to simulate reality don't make an expert in self defense. Neither does a championship belt. But a solid competitor will teach you how to defend an aggressive physical attack, and will be qualified to do so. What makes one qualified to teach soft techniques? I can think of a few, an LEO, lawyer, a psychologist, in some cases.


----------



## jks9199 (Mar 4, 2015)

Danny T said:


> There numerous threads concerning self-defense with most all on fighting, fighting back, and/or about one system being better vs some other system.
> But what is self-defense? Is it fighting or is it much more? Most all MA schools, gyms...etc claim to teach self-defense; do they?
> What is self-defense???


Self defense is a legal concept, a justification for using force to protect yourself.  It's an affirmative defense to the allegation that you broke the law and committed an assault and battery on someone.  You're saying that you did indeed do it -- but that you were justified in doing so because you were in reasonable fear of imminent bodily harm.

In a broad sense, it's the set of skills that go into recognizing, avoiding, and preparing for a situation that could lead you to using the legal justification.


----------



## Mephisto (Mar 4, 2015)

I think a lot of people looking into martial arts want fitness and the ability to protect themselves if they were ever attacked. Most people rarely get into fights so it's fair to assume they're good at avoiding conflict. More knowledge never hurts, but a lot of the soft techniques seem like they'd be pretty obvious. How many people sign up for self defense classes expecting to be lectured for an hour? A lecture is just what smart self defense may call for but I don't think it what most people are after.


----------



## MJS (Mar 4, 2015)

Danny T said:


> There numerous threads concerning self-defense with most all on fighting, fighting back, and/or about one system being better vs some other system.
> But what is self-defense? Is it fighting or is it much more? Most all MA schools, gyms...etc claim to teach self-defense; do they?
> What is self-defense???



Tony pretty much summed it up with the post he made.  IMO, fighting is 1 part of it.  Awareness, verbally defusing a situation...those are things that are just as important, but are often left out of the material taught at the typical martial arts school.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 4, 2015)

I'm doing all I can to not get into the "you are a larper and your art is a sham" discussions that go on here and every place on the internet that people gather to talk about martial arts. I agree that self defense and martial arts are not the same thing, though I don't think they are mutually exclusive. Any time I read "most schools don't..." or "the majority of styles can't..." it's all I can do not to start asking for supporting data. What percentage, what's your sample size? What aside from YouTube and the x places that you've trained or visited are you basing that on? But...

Without getting into how I teach, let me tell you the ongoing game that I have with my 6 year old son. We're in a parking lot and I say "Okay, what color is the car that we just walked past? Was it empty or was anyone inside?" or "Okay, don't turn around, how many people are sitting at the table behind you?"..."where are the exits?" ... "Was the person walking that dog a man or a woman? What color was their coat?" (he can always describe the dog) It's a game that he's grown up with. He doesn't really know why we play it, but he wants to win, so he notices stuff. I don't scare him, it's just a skill that I want him to develop.

When we're downtown, he understands that he has much less freedom than in our neighborhood to drop behind or run ahead of me. We have code words for safety and when I say them, he immediately and explicitly follows my instructions and he knows that he can ask me later and I will tell him why, but right now....

I don't teach kids, I only teach adults. They get MUCH more and more explicit versions of this training, coupled with physical training and our system. I don't want to get into how I teach beyond that, because it's private. I'm not "most schools", but I am a fairly common style. We're not all the same. The more public schools and people tend to be with their training, the less like us they are likely to be. That said, I'm not alone, a lot of people are less public about their training, don't assume you know about what you aren't seeing on-line. I also don't claim that what I do is better than what someone else does, though I'll bet the forum $1 that someone will reply and say that about this post.

When students ask what Wing Chun books they can read to help them learn faster I give them a list:

Strong on Defense - Sanford Strong
Meditations on Violence - Rory Miller
The Little Black Book of Violence - Lawrence Kane and Chris Wilder
Scaling Force - Lawrence Kane and Rory Miller
The Gift of Fear - Gavin de Becker

I usually use the term "Personal Safety" over "Self Defense", though it's semantics. I was taught that way, I study, I practice and I teach that way. I also practice and teach a traditional Chinese style in a very traditional way. They are not mutually exclusive in my eyes, but I'm not selling anything and I encourage everyone to find what and where is best for them to train.

Just my input. I think this is a great conversation for us to have if we can avoid the very stale argument about MMA vs TMA, NEITHER of them are self defense on their own.

I'm sure that I could learn a lot about personal safety from some of you here and I would like to do so.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 4, 2015)

Defend
: to fight or to work hard in order to keep someone or something safe
: to not allow something or a person to hurt, damage, or destroy (someone or something)
: to fight or work hard in order to keep something, such as a right, interest or cause from being taken away
: to speak or write in support of something

Self-defense
: the actions taken to protect yourself, your love ones, your property from: damage, destruction, being used without permission, or being taken from you.
: the actions that make you capable of protecting yourself during an attack or a situation that you may be harmed by something or someone.

Self defense is being aware of the potential dangers and doing what one is required to prevent or to lessen that potential.
-Locking the doors and windows to your home or place of business.
-Having outside lighting.
-Understanding the possibility of going into the bad areas of your town at the wrong time of day/night and not being there.
-Using a bit of human psychology to defuse a potential argument preventing it to become physically aggressive.
-When out on the town being with friends and not going it alone.
-Acknowledging bad weather is approaching and batting down your shutters picking up the things in the yard that could become wind blown missiles. If need be leave the area; like when a hurricane is approaching with devastating winds and storm surge.

These are but a few examples of forms of self defense that have nothing to do with fighting or the marital arts. Yet all could be taught within the martial arts or a self-defense class.

Self-defense is far more than fighting, though fighting when justified can be a form of self-defense. Simply getting up and leaving can also be a very effective form.
There are many others, thing is that self defense is much more that the confines of fighting or the martial arts.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 4, 2015)

Situational defence would be the better term.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 4, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Situational defence would be the better term.


It is all situational.


----------



## Zero (Mar 5, 2015)

ShortBridge said:


> I'm doing all I can to not get into the "you are a larper and your art is a sham" discussions that go on here and every place on the internet that people gather to talk about martial arts. I agree that self defense and martial arts are not the same thing, though I don't think they are mutually exclusive. Any time I read "most schools don't..." or "the majority of styles can't..." it's all I can do not to start asking for supporting data. What percentage, what's your sample size? What aside from YouTube and the x places that you've trained or visited are you basing that on? But...
> 
> Without getting into how I teach, let me tell you the ongoing game that I have with my 6 year old son. We're in a parking lot and I say "Okay, what color is the car that we just walked past? Was it empty or was anyone inside?" or "Okay, don't turn around, how many people are sitting at the table behind you?"..."where are the exits?" ... "Was the person walking that dog a man or a woman? What color was their coat?" (he can always describe the dog) It's a game that he's grown up with. He doesn't really know why we play it, but he wants to win, so he notices stuff. I don't scare him, it's just a skill that I want him to develop.
> 
> ...



Thanks, my kid is a bit younger but I already try to impart the basics of SD, from road and traffic safety to rules to not opening the front door etc unless mum or dad have given the go ahead, and making activities of such where appropriate so they are drilled home.  The situational awareness "game" you play with your boy is a nice example and will be fun without adding elements of concern for a young mind so I am going to take that off your shelf and use it myself.  Cheers. ...also, my own memory could do with a bit of a jump start at times so it may be just as useful for me!!  :  )


----------



## Argus (Mar 5, 2015)

ShortBridge said:


> Without getting into how I teach, let me tell you the ongoing game that I have with my 6 year old son. We're in a parking lot and I say "Okay, what color is the car that we just walked past? Was it empty or was anyone inside?" or "Okay, don't turn around, how many people are sitting at the table behind you?"..."where are the exits?" ... "Was the person walking that dog a man or a woman? What color was their coat?" (he can always describe the dog) It's a game that he's grown up with. He doesn't really know why we play it, but he wants to win, so he notices stuff. I don't scare him, it's just a skill that I want him to develop.



Interesting.

That's a really neat game. Unfortunately, I think I would fail miserably no matter how often I were to play it. I'm a highly intuitive type, rather than sensing, so I tend to take in general impressions and gloss over the details entirely. I'm pretty much useless if you ask me for directions 

Nonetheless, I feel that I do cultivate a "defensive" mindset in other ways. I make it a point to form good / safe habits, anticipate behavior, and think about the situation at hand and how it might develop. This has served me especially well in driving. Many people are very "reactionary" in the way they drive, and I believe that, more than anything, leads to accidents. So, in contrast, I'm always making note of people's behavior and intentions, and looking for potentially dangerous situations before they occur. I make it a point not to surprise, cut off, or in any other way cause other drivers to react to my actions, while also perceiving their intentions, and looking out for any unexpected or dangerous actions they might take. Driving is almost like a game of "flow" for me, where I try to work with peoples intentions in order to navigate traffic, rather than trying to "impose" my will. This has allowed me to avoid accidents on numerous occasions, and is probably one of the most practical every day "self defense" skills one can develop.


----------



## LibbyW (Mar 6, 2015)

I like to think that good self defence is the absence of fighting, so by not allowing a situation to progress into a fight i.e. throwing down with someone. I think if a situation has developed to the point of trading blows with an attacker you are no longer defending yourself - you are in fact in a _fight_.
The alternative is that as soon as someone is physically aggressive towards you, even just them putting their hands on you, immediately immobilize them, don't give them the chance to start throwing around haymakers.
Controlling them with locks or takedowns is probably best. But saying that I think the applicability of what I just said breaks down the more the opponents stack-up. So if you are faced with any more than two, whether it has gotten to the fight stage yet, chances are you are going to need to start kicking and punching really hard if your going to make it out in one whole piece.
And coming out in anything less always sucks ballz. I've lost a whole fistful of hair during a scuffle once, hurt like a SOB when it got ripped out.

Almost all situations where you will need to defend yourself will vary greatly. More often than not, if you can, run your *** off like you have all the 66 legions of Baal chasing you.
If running isn't much of an option (I'm always in danger of being knocked out by my own appendages) then you need to make sure your are the baddest mutha f**ker in the room.
Which I have been told can be achieved by looking like this:


----------



## Jenna (Mar 7, 2015)

Danny T said:


> These are but a few examples of forms of self defense that have nothing to do with fighting or the marital arts. Yet all could be taught within the martial arts or a self-defense class.


Agree with you these can be seen as forms of defending oneself or defending others.  Are you saying these SHOULD / OUGHT TO be taught along with MA techniques in an MA class or just that you would welcome it? Jx


----------



## Danny T (Mar 7, 2015)

Jenna said:


> Agree with you these can be seen as forms of defending oneself or defending others.  Are you saying these SHOULD / OUGHT TO be taught along with MA techniques in an MA class or just that you would welcome it? Jx



Hi Jenna,
What I wrote was:
_"These are but a few examples of forms of self defense that have nothing to do with fighting or the marital arts. Yet all could be taught within the martial arts or a self-defense class.

Self-defense is far more than fighting, though fighting when justified can be a form of self-defense. Simply getting up and leaving can also be a very effective form.
There are many others, thing is that self defense is much more that the confines of fighting or the martial arts."_

My original question was to ask what others defined as self-defense because from my experience in the martial arts world most teach fighting or fighting back as self defense. In my opinion fighting has very little to do with self defense and 'if' a martial school is claiming to teach self defense but only instructs/teaches/trains fighting or fighting back then all they are teaching is fighting. Self defense is far more than fighting.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 7, 2015)

Danny T said:


> Defend
> Self-defense
> : the actions taken to protect yourself, your love ones, your property from: damage, destruction, being used without permission, or being taken from you.
> : the actions that make you capable of protecting yourself during an attack or a situation that you may be harmed by something or someone.
> ...



A prime example of why I never attended a Self-Defense class.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 7, 2015)

Because you have nothing to learn about self-defense, home defense, a car jacking, a kidnapping, how about a automotive self-defense evasive driving or any other number of possibilities?


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 7, 2015)

Danny T said:


> Because you have nothing to learn about self-defense, home defense, a car jacking, a kidnapping, how about a automotive self-defense evasive driving or any other number of possibilities?



No, frankly I don't. However, I am a 6'2, 215lb male. So there isn't much I need to worry about.

Now if I was a woman, that would be a different story entirely.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 7, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> No, frankly I don't. However, I am a 6'2, 215lb male. So there isn't much I need to worry about.


Now that's funny!
Yes, 6'2" males need little self defense training. They are intuitive and are already knowledgeable in most all aspects of self-defense. The two guys that train with us who are over 6'2", we call them six four and six five,are wasting their time training in several of our self-defensive programs. We also have several other over 6 footers as well. 
Not certain they if they are 6'2". Must be either under or over cause they feel they need the training.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Mar 7, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> No, frankly I don't. However, I am a 6'2, 215lb male. So there isn't much I need to worry about.


You should worry!


----------



## Drose427 (Mar 7, 2015)

RTKDCMB said:


> You should worry!



 Why? He's 3 inches taller and barely 20 lbs heavier than the average individual man! Everyone just cowers apparently


----------



## LibbyW (Mar 8, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> No, frankly I don't. However, I am a 6'2, 215lb male. So there isn't much I need to worry about.
> 
> Now if I was a woman, that would be a different story entirely.



Oh dear....seriously?...there are still people that think like this in the world? I thought evolution had sorted out this type of thing


----------



## Argus (Mar 8, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> No, frankly I don't. However, I am a 6'2, 215lb male. So there isn't much I need to worry about.
> 
> Now if I was a woman, that would be a different story entirely.



I am a 5'8 125lb male.

Put a knife or a gun in my hand. Do you need to worry about someone my size now?

How about me? Do I need to worry about training if I have a firearm, or another weapon, or am I just good to go given my advantage?


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 8, 2015)

Argus said:


> I am a 5'8 125lb male.
> 
> Put a knife or a gun in my hand. Do you need to worry about someone my size now?
> 
> How about me? Do I need to worry about training if I have a firearm, or another weapon, or am I just good to go given my advantage?



And do I really need to learn self defense to deal with someone who pulls a gun or knife on me? If someone is armed and trying to mug you, toss them your wallet. If someone wants your car, toss them your car keys and get away.

There, I just saved you money learning "self defense".

Unlike the firearm and the knife, I can take my size anywhere I go. If I were your size, I'd enroll in a good martial arts program and call it a day. I would also invest in a good pair of running shoes. Preferably Nike.


----------



## Argus (Mar 8, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> And do I really need to learn self defense to deal with someone who pulls a gun or knife on me? If someone is armed and trying to mug you, toss them your wallet. If someone wants your car, toss them your car keys and get away.
> 
> There, I just saved you money learning "self defense".
> 
> Unlike the firearm and the knife, I can take my size anywhere I go. If I were your size, I'd enroll in a good martial arts program and call it a day.



Tossing your wallet doesn't fix all situations, though it's certainly a prudent move in some. I might just shoot you anyway -- happens more than you might think. But perhaps I just took something you said as an insult, and thought it would be a good idea to crack your head open with a nearby inanimate object. Or maybe a confrontation is what I'm out to find. Maybe you're just sitting in your car, with your doors unlocked, and I open the door and jump in. Or perhaps, I don't even want a confrontation at all, and am just looking to rummage through your house or car while you're gone. You show up, I get spooked, and shoot at you.

These kinds of things aren't hypothetical situations. They happen all of the time. I've even had one of them happen to me personally. In broad daylight. In a "safe" area of town. And I was simply lucky. I could have handled the situation in a much better way than I did, but I was off my guard and had never given it any forethought. That could have cost me dearly.

The question is, could you avoid, prevent, de-escelate, physically handle or escape the situation if things go south, and deal properly with the legal after-math of any of those circumstances should the outcome require it? You can't assume you know what is going to happen, or even what you will do.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 8, 2015)

Old proverb...the bigger they are the harder the fall.

When I was working we dealt with very strong, big fit Fijian soldiers who could be very aggressive when drunk. They can be brought down with only a little more effort than anyone else. Always a mistake to assume that size is everything.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 8, 2015)

Argus said:


> Tossing your wallet doesn't fix all situations, though it's certainly a prudent move in some. I might just shoot you anyway -- happens more than you might think. But perhaps I just took something you said as an insult, and thought it would be a good idea to crack your head open with a nearby inanimate object. Or maybe a confrontation is what I'm out to find. Maybe you're just sitting in your car, with your doors unlocked, and I open the door and jump in. Or perhaps, I don't even want a confrontation at all, and am just looking to rummage through your house or car while you're gone. You show up, I get spooked, and shoot at you.
> 
> These kinds of things aren't hypothetical situations. They happen all of the time. I've even had one of them happen to me personally. In broad daylight. In a "safe" area of town. And I was simply lucky. I could have handled the situation in a much better way than I did, but I was off my guard and had never given it any forethought. That could have cost me dearly.
> 
> The question is, could you avoid, prevent, de-escelate, physically handle or escape the situation if things go south, and deal properly with the legal after-math of any of those circumstances should the outcome require it? You can't assume you know what is going to happen, or even what you will do.



There's no way to know for certain. We'll simply have to cross that bridge when we get there. You can't train for every possible scenario, and frankly even if you did that, you wouldn't be prepared for every possible scenario. Considering my size and MA training, I'm sure I could handle a good deal of physical confrontations if things go south. I'm also a pretty happy go lucky person, and have talked my way out of many bad situations.

In the end, I'm not going to live my life always looking over my shoulder, or gearing up for a life or death struggle if a stranger approaches me in a parking lot. That's simply paranoia, and I refuse to pay someone money to make me paranoid. I've lived in rough neighborhoods, I've gone to dive bars full of bikers, or thug wannabes. Never had any problems. Listening to some of those self defense types, you'd think we're in some kind of war or something. In reality, that simply isn't the case.

Now if I were a woman, that would be a different situation, because women are more likely to be victimized than men. Predators would only attack me if they want something of monetary value. Predators would attack a woman for a completely different set of reasons.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Mar 8, 2015)

Danny T said:


> But what is self-defense? Is it fighting or is it much more? Most all MA schools, gyms...etc claim to teach self-defense; do they?



Claiming to teach SD and actually teaching it are two entirely different things.  One is marketing, the other is practical/tactical and experience.  Self defense begins long before the fight begins and seeks to avoid the fight in the first place or at least mitigate the consequences.  As mentioned earlier, there is the legal aspect.  How many schools teach the legal aspect?  How many schools teach the aftermath of an attack i.e. contact with police, medical self aid or aid to others?  How many teach avoidance, escape, evasion or verbal de-esculation?  How about weapons and improvised weapons? 

I always go back to the philosophical conversation between Earl and Vale on top of the boulder while the huge mutant underground worm circles waiting to eat them;

Earl:  We need a plan.

Vale:  I say we just make a run for it.

Earl:  Run!?!  Running's not a plan...running is what you do when the plan fails!

Same with self defense i.e. fighting isn't the plan...fighting is what you do when the plan fails.  The plan (self defense) begins before you leave the house.  So no, most schools don't know what self defense is or what it takes to achieve it, much less teach it. 



> For the purposes of this thread we can define self-defense as the strategies, principles, tactics and techniques to defend oneself and/or loved ones from and attack which can cause bodily harm, great bodily harm and/or death.
> 
> To begin with, most types of training revolve around some/most/all of the following considerations:
> 
> ...


----------



## Argus (Mar 8, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> There's no way to know for certain. We'll simply have to cross that bridge when we get there. You can't train for every possible scenario, and frankly even if you did that, you wouldn't be prepared for every possible scenario. Considering my size and MA training, I'm sure I could handle a good deal of physical confrontations if things go south. I'm also a pretty happy go lucky person, and have talked my way out of many bad situations.
> 
> In the end, I'm not going to live my life always looking over my shoulder, or gearing up for a life or death struggle if a stranger approaches me in a parking lot. That's simply paranoia, and I refuse to pay someone money to make me paranoid. I've lived in rough neighborhoods, I've gone to dive bars full of bikers, or thug wannabes. Never had any problems. Listening to some of those self defense types, you'd think we're in some kind of war or something. In reality, that simply isn't the case.
> 
> Now if I were a woman, that would be a different situation, because women are more likely to be victimized than men. Predators would only attack me if they want something of monetary value. Predators would attack a woman for a completely different set of reasons.



Well, I completely agree with your overall sentiment. Some people certainly do overplay SD concerns. But I do not believe that one needs to live in constant paranoia, nor train for every possible situation in order to be more prepared. A lot of it comes down to understanding, awareness, mindset, and habits - general concepts that you can apply across the board and in more situations than just potential violent encounters.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Mar 8, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> In the end, I'm not going to live my life always looking over my shoulder, or gearing up for a life or death struggle if a stranger approaches me in a parking lot. That's simply paranoia, and I refuse to pay someone money to make me paranoid


Then why are you in the arts if not to prepare yourself for such situations if they occure

[


Hanzou said:


> Listening to some of those self defense types, you'd think we're in some kind of war or something. In reality, that simply isn't the case.




Obviously you have not walked or lived in some of the areas I have where shootings and knifing  happened on the streets and parking lots at least once a week. Gangs shooting at anyone wearing the wrong color  of beatin thee hell out of anyone not of their  ethnic background who dared to walk on their streets.  It did not matter how big or small you where if you where an outsider you could be considered fair game.  Yes it was a war for some of these people in their mind thats why many of them are dead or in jail today


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 9, 2015)

Self defense is a way of living. It is a choice of clothing and of what you carry - not just weapons, but what's in your wallet, purse, pocket. Self-defense is how you walk from one room to the other, how you answer your phone, how you step outside, how you drive. It is where you sit in a restaurant, what kind of shoes you wear, how you talk to the people around you. Self defense is recognizing potential dangers and doing your best to avoid them. It is knowing how, when and with whom to form alliances in territory such as Tshadowchaser referred to above. It's about where you get your mail and what kind of committment you have to living and dying.

Self-defense is a 3-year-old with no training thrashing about when clutched by a stranger. Self-defense is an 80-year-old woman beating the crap out of an attacker with her purse, hands, shoe, whatever she can get her hands on. It is about installing two peep-holes in your door - one for you and one for your children. 

It is about reading people and anticipating potential danger. It is knowing how to de-escalate someone and reserving your "ammo" for only when you need it. It is about the act, the game, the attitude.

It is about law, which is always about spin and perception. It is about your history and propensity for illegal activities. It is about your citizenship and your family.

If it must come to combat, it's about distance, timing, weapons, intent, ability and opportunity. THAT is when it is about training and preparation.

As to our social evolution ... as long as humans live, there will always be terrible people. And as long as there are terrible people, there will be the unfortunate need to subdue them.


----------



## K-man (Mar 9, 2015)

Last week in Krav class we were talking SD and not looking like a victim. I walked down the line, "Yeah, I wouldn't pick you. You have tats so you must be tough." "Mmm, you look like a fit young bugger, I won't pick, you",  etc. etc. until I got to a big guy possibly 6'3" or 6'4". "Bloody hell! I wouldn't pick you. You're too big." We discussed the idea that anyone challenging you had already decided they could beat you and so on. At the end of the discussion the big guy, ex MMA out of interest, said to me, "You know, guys try to pick me all the time". Let me say, he certainly isn't the type of guy I would be choosing to fight but just goes to show, size doesn't always protect you from violence and anyone who reckons they don't need SD skills is a fool.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Mar 9, 2015)

K-man said:


> Last week in Krav class we were talking SD and not looking like a victim. I walked down the line, "Yeah, I wouldn't pick you. You have tats so you must be tough." "Mmm, you look like a fit young bugger, I won't pick, you",  etc. etc. until I got to a big guy possibly 6'3" or 6'4". "Bloody hell! I wouldn't pick you. You're too big." We discussed the idea that anyone challenging you had already decided they could beat you and so on. At the end of the discussion the big guy, ex MMA out of interest, said to me, "You know, guys try to pick me all the time". Let me say, he certainly isn't the type of guy I would be choosing to fight but just goes to show, size doesn't always protect you from violence and anyone who reckons they don't need SD skills is a fool.



Certainly the setting and motivation behind the attack will be factors (as well as the possible presence of what we call "beer muscles"...), it's also true that there are those who will be far more confrontational to someone they perceive as a threat or challenge. 
I'm 6'1" and 220. And there are absolutely people who will want to fight with me but who will be totally chill if we send in a woman or a smaller man. And of course, there are those who will be a complete douchnozzle to someone they think they can intimidate, but chill when it's me.


----------



## Jenna (Mar 9, 2015)

Danny T said:


> Hi Jenna,
> What I wrote was:
> _"These are but a few examples of forms of self defense that have nothing to do with fighting or the marital arts. Yet all could be taught within the martial arts or a self-defense class.
> 
> ...


Danny while I understand the point you are making I wonder why you think fighting has little to do with SD?  If you mean to define fighting as trading blow for blow then at some time in defence of myself or others is it not possible that (when other more preferable options are absent) I may be forced to do just this very trading blow for blow?  This is the real world we are talking surely and not the sterility of a forum discussion?  What do you think? Jx


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 9, 2015)

tshadowchaser said:


> Then why are you in the arts if not to prepare yourself for such situations if they occure



For a variety of reasons. Self defense is actually pretty low on the list. However, part of the reason I do it is to teach it to my wife and daughters.




> Obviously you have not walked or lived in some of the areas I have where shootings and knifing  happened on the streets and parking lots at least once a week.



Obviously you have no idea what you're talking about, nor know anything about where or how I grew up.

Nice assumption though.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Mar 9, 2015)

If self defense is so low on your list what exactly are you teaching your wife and daughters.
Sorry if I presumed that you had not walked the streets I did or that you had not walked similar ones but if you had you would have know that in many cities the gangs are at war and outsiders are targets


----------



## Mephisto (Mar 9, 2015)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Claiming to teach SD and actually teaching it are two entirely different things.  One is marketing, the other is practical/tactical and experience.  Self defense begins long before the fight begins and seeks to avoid the fight in the first place or at least mitigate the consequences.  As mentioned earlier, there is the legal aspect.  How many schools teach the legal aspect?  How many schools teach the aftermath of an attack i.e. contact with police, medical self aid or aid to others?  How many teach avoidance, escape, evasion or verbal de-esculation?  How about weapons and improvised weapons?
> 
> I always go back to the philosophical conversation between Earl and Vale on top of the boulder while the huge mutant underground worm circles waiting to eat them;
> 
> ...



I think you make some good points. But I also think what we view as self defense is an evolving term. So something that doesn't fit your definition isn't necessarily wrong, it could just be more complete. It seems like years ago self defense was pretty much any martial art. All the popular arts had "self defense" written on their store fronts, and it's still common today. I doubt many of these schools are teaching highly specific, scenario training, de escalation, legal ramifications, and other "soft techniques." What the common self defense class will teach is straight up standard curriculum, and maybe some specific escapes. There's nothing wrong with this approach but there is more to the equation.


----------



## jks9199 (Mar 9, 2015)

K-man said:


> Last week in Krav class we were talking SD and not looking like a victim. I walked down the line, "Yeah, I wouldn't pick you. You have tats so you must be tough." "Mmm, you look like a fit young bugger, I won't pick, you",  etc. etc. until I got to a big guy possibly 6'3" or 6'4". "Bloody hell! I wouldn't pick you. You're too big." We discussed the idea that anyone challenging you had already decided they could beat you and so on. At the end of the discussion the big guy, ex MMA out of interest, said to me, "You know, guys try to pick me all the time". Let me say, he certainly isn't the type of guy I would be choosing to fight but just goes to show, size doesn't always protect you from violence and anyone who reckons they don't need SD skills is a fool.


Do they "pick him" as a target for predation like robbery, or do they pick him for social violence, to try to prove themselves against him?  Different situations, different target selection principle. In some ways -- almost opposite.  Through a predator's eyes, I want the weak and vulnerable who have what I need.  But if I'm trying to raise my social status, and I target the weakest and least capable -- it's not going to help my social standing at all.

Also -- in a social situation, is he sending a signal that's triggering people to challenge him?


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 9, 2015)

tshadowchaser said:


> If self defense is so low on your list what exactly are you teaching your wife and daughters.



The same stuff I've learned. For example, the chances of a man trying to sexually assault me is pretty low, but the chances of that happening to a female member of my family is substantially higher. Learning the Guard, and chokes, sweeps, and breaks from that position is critical.



> Sorry if I presumed that you had not walked the streets I did or that you had not walked similar ones but if you had you would have know that in many cities the gangs are at war and outsiders are targets



Yeah, I grew up in Gary Indiana, right outside of Chicago in the late 80s, early 90s. Wasn't exactly the Wonder Years.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 9, 2015)

Jenna said:


> Danny while I understand the point you are making I wonder why you think fighting has little to do with SD?  If you mean to define fighting as trading blow for blow then at some time in defence of myself or others is it not possible that (when other more preferable options are absent) I may be forced to do just this very trading blow for blow?  This is the real world we are talking surely and not the sterility of a forum discussion?  What do you think? Jx



Certainly Jenna; I also stated_, “…though fighting when justified can be a form of self-defense.”_

If one were aware and vigilant the situation may never get to the point of having to physically defend. Self defense is a mindset and for some of us a life style. It is what one does prior to getting to the point of fighting as well. Fighting, the physical confrontation, should always be the last resort of self defense. Though there may be a time when all one has the time for is to physically defend themselves. However, when reviewing the time lines of violent actions there are usually several ques given or things the attack did or did not do that could have prevented the action.


----------



## Shajikfer (Mar 27, 2015)

Danny T said:


> There numerous threads concerning self-defense with most all on fighting, fighting back, and/or about one system being better vs some other system.
> But what is self-defense? Is it fighting or is it much more? Most all MA schools, gyms...etc claim to teach self-defense; do they?
> What is self-defense???


 
I consider it any means of protecting oneself when under combat. Self-defense in martial arts is using techniques to defend oneself. But 'self-defense' by itself does not necessitate using martial arts. For example, say I have done TKD for twenty years and someone attacks me and I have a gun. If I have a gun and stop the attack, I have self-defended myself (bad english?) but did so without using martial arts.

A lot of martial artists when attacked do not use what they practice. Many do of course, but in a fight or flight situation sometimes one's instincts can take over. That is what happened to me as a kid; I'd done the arts for 10 years and got into a schoolyard scrap and lost badly. I switched schools, and when someone pulled a knife on me, with better training and more maturity I was able to utilize those techniques I had learned from both styles and get the knife away.


----------



## Argus (Mar 27, 2015)

Shajikfer said:


> I consider it any means of protecting oneself when under combat. Self-defense in martial arts is using techniques to defend oneself. But 'self-defense' by itself does not necessitate using martial arts. For example, say I have done TKD for twenty years and someone attacks me and I have a gun. If I have a gun and stop the attack, I have self-defended myself (bad english?) but did so without using martial arts.
> 
> A lot of martial artists when attacked do not use what they practice. Many do of course, but in a fight or flight situation sometimes one's instincts can take over. That is what happened to me as a kid; I'd done the arts for 10 years and got into a schoolyard scrap and lost badly. I switched schools, and when someone pulled a knife on me, with better training and more maturity I was able to utilize those techniques I had learned from both styles and get the knife away.




If you practice operating your firearm, I consider that "martial arts." Learning defensive pistol is no less a martial art than learning to use a sword, stick, or spear, but because it is martial training in a modern sense, people tend to disassociate the two for some reason. You might argue that it is less formalized, ritualistic, or more directly focused on self-defense or combat, but even some "martial arts" meet a number of those criteria in their modern form; to say nothing of their original form.


----------



## Shajikfer (Mar 27, 2015)

Argus said:


> If you practice operating your firearm, I consider that "martial arts." Learning defensive pistol is no less a martial art than learning to use a sword, stick, or spear, but because it is martial training in a modern sense, people tend to disassociate the two for some reason. You might argue that it is less formalized, ritualistic, or more directly focused on self-defense or combat, but even some "martial arts" meet a number of those criteria in their modern form; to say nothing of their original form.


 

That's certainly true, but in the sense of what I wrote I meant it moreso as someone who had no training with their own firearm, and barely more practice.

I suppose I could have put my example as... you've been training in WTF TKD and when mugged take a rock and bludgeon them with it. You utilized something you haven't been trained in to survive, rather than the arts you have been practicing.


----------



## Argus (Mar 27, 2015)

Shajikfer said:


> That's certainly true, but in the sense of what I wrote I meant it moreso as someone who had no training with their own firearm, and barely more practice.
> 
> I suppose I could have put my example as... you've been training in WTF TKD and when mugged take a rock and bludgeon them with it. You utilized something you haven't been trained in to survive, rather than the arts you have been practicing.



Well, every art has its context and "subject matter." But reality dictates that sometimes real world situations step outside of the context that you might have trained for. In that case, there's no sense in trying to apply your art to do something it wasn't designed for. In that case, you just do your best. Your martial training may help you in more general ways, or it may not, depending on the circumstances.


----------



## Shajikfer (Mar 27, 2015)

Of course it should, I merely delineated because I consider self-defense to not necessarily entail utilizing martial arts.


----------



## Argus (Mar 27, 2015)

Shajikfer said:


> Of course it should, I merely delineated because I consider self-defense to not necessarily entail utilizing martial arts.



Ah, I understand. My point though is that martial arts are a broad subject, and therefore I think it's a good idea to get a wide array of training. Some people view every encounter through the lense of one particular art, and I think that's dangerous. It can become a case of trying to make the tool fit the job, rather than using the right tool for the job. That's why in addition to my empty hands training, I am seeking out firearms training and instruction in filipino martial arts. I may not ever need to use any of it, nor may I ever even become particularly competent in all of those areas, but at least I will be familiar with the subject matter should I ever be confronted with it.

Plus, you know, it's all fun to train


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 27, 2015)

If you are interested in SD, you should train the grappling art. The reason is simple, when you choke your opponent and make your arms tighter and tighter, you can ask him, "Can we have peace?" If he says yes, you can let go your arms, help him to get back up from the ground, shake his hand, have a beer, and become best friend. You just can't do that when your fist meets your opponent's face, break his nose, and blood start to come out of his nose.


----------



## Argus (Mar 27, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you are interested in SD, you should train the grappling art. The reason is simple, when you choke your opponent and make your arms tighter and tighter, you can ask him, "Can we have peace?" If he says yes, you can let go your arms, help him to get back up from the ground, shake his hand, have a beer, and become best friend. You just can't do that when your fist meets your opponent's face, break his nose, and blood start to come out of his nose.



Nothing wrong with grappling, but you're just demonstrating my point here.

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.


----------



## Argus (Mar 27, 2015)

Shajikfer said:


> Of course it should, I merely delineated because I consider self-defense to not necessarily entail utilizing martial arts.



Ah, one point I forgot to make, Shajikfer!

If say, you do pick up a rock to defend yourself with, as per your example -- even though it is something you've never trained specifically to use, do you think you would have a better idea of how to wield it than if you'd had no training at all? How about your attacker? Are you not able to better recognize and counter his actions thanks to your training?

Even if you don't deal with the specifics, there's a lot of value in the broader intuitive understanding that you gain from any art, I feel.


----------



## Shajikfer (Mar 27, 2015)

Argus said:


> Ah, one point I forgot to make, Shajikfer:
> 
> If say, you do pick up a rock to defend yourself with, as per your example -- even though it is something you've never trained specifically to use, do you think you would have a better idea of how to wield it than if you'd had no training at all? How about your attacker? Are you not able to better recognize and counter his actions thanks to your training?
> 
> Even if you don't deal with the specifics, there's a lot of value in the broader intuitive understanding that you gain from any art, I feel.


 
From my understanding that is what Arnis emphasizes; utilizing weapons you will come across practically.

I agree there is a lot you can understand and develop; better reflex time, combat strategies etc.

So yes, with training one could utilize a weapon more efficiently than if you hadn't had training. It's why I enjoyed those classes one eccentric teacher I had where we'd roll up magazines and practice baton techniques, and one particularly memorable occasion where he gave us a bunch of coins and told us to figure out how to defend ourselves with them. You'd be surprised what you can come up with on your own, especially with direction.


----------



## marques (Jun 16, 2015)

Danny T said:


> But what is self-defense? Is it fighting or is it much more? Most all MA schools, gyms...etc claim to teach self-defense; do they?
> What is self-defense???


That's a good question. Sadly self-defense is, usually, just a label to sell better. So anything is self-defense nowadays.
But this is a really complex question. An an even more complex answer.
First we should know what is violence? Too many faces of it out there...


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jun 17, 2015)

jks9199 said:


> Do they "pick him" as a target for predation like robbery, or do they pick him for social violence, to try to prove themselves against him?  Different situations, different target selection principle. In some ways -- almost opposite.  Through a predator's eyes, I want the weak and vulnerable who have what I need.  But if I'm trying to raise my social status, and I target the weakest and least capable -- it's not going to help my social standing at all.
> 
> Also -- in a social situation, is he sending a signal that's triggering people to challenge him?



This is very important to figure out for your own personal protection strategy.  Why would someone  pick you for violence, robbery, etc.  Then, how to avoid being picked out is your goal!


----------



## wingchunguy (Jun 24, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Self defense is anything and everything you do to protect yourself. Anything from washing your hands or wearing your seat belt to situational awareness, conflict avoidance, learning defensive tactics and techniques...



Very interesting way to put it, Dirty Dog! In a way, you are right! EVERYTHING we do to protect ourselves from all the bad things out there, which includes diseases, accidents and attacks is considered, in my opinion, self defense.


----------



## wingchunguy (Jun 24, 2015)

marques said:


> That's a good question. Sadly self-defense is, usually, just a label to sell better. So anything is self-defense nowadays.
> But this is a really complex question. An an even more complex answer.
> First we should know what is violence? Too many faces of it out there...



No! MMA gyms teach SPORT, not SELF DEFENSE! Though you can use it on the streets against inexperienced fighters, drunk and thugs, against REAL opponents, it is USELESS! This is because the sports applications have been watered down to exclude moves that might save your life one day. All the nasty moves that could cause serious damage to your opponent is left out. You also have to take into account the fact that they fight with gloves, timers, referees and doctors on call. Sports applications fall short in reality.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 24, 2015)

wingchunguy said:


> No! MMA gyms teach SPORT, not SELF DEFENSE! Though you can use it on the streets against inexperienced fighters, drunk and thugs, against REAL opponents, it is USELESS! This is because the sports applications have been watered down to exclude moves that might save your life one day. All the nasty moves that could cause serious damage to your opponent is left out. You also have to take into account the fact that they fight with gloves, timers, referees and doctors on call. Sports applications fall short in reality.




Do you imagine then that MMA people can't fight without rules or referees? They can I assure you, it's quite easy to do techniques in self defence that are illegal in sport, it takes no more effort to do these illegal moves than it does the legal ones. Your blindness where MMA is concerned is causing you to under estimate MMA people.
The techniques haven't been watered down at all, in the rules certain techniques have been omitted. They can be put in for self defence purposes. You also fail to understand that many MMA people also train self defence and TMAs.
Not all TMA instruction is good for self defence either, it's pointless making sweeping generalisations about training.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 24, 2015)

wingchunguy said:


> No! MMA gyms teach SPORT, not SELF DEFENSE! Though you can use it on the streets against inexperienced fighters, drunk and thugs, against REAL opponents, it is USELESS!


Are you saying that a "sport" technique like this has no self-defense value "against REAL opponents"?


----------



## Argus (Jun 24, 2015)

wingchunguy said:


> No! MMA gyms teach SPORT, not SELF DEFENSE! Though you can use it on the streets against inexperienced fighters, drunk and thugs, against REAL opponents, it is USELESS! This is because the sports applications have been watered down to exclude moves that might save your life one day. All the nasty moves that could cause serious damage to your opponent is left out. You also have to take into account the fact that they fight with gloves, timers, referees and doctors on call. Sports applications fall short in reality.



I would be careful commenting about things that I haven't trained. Often, your impressions as an outsider are not very accurate. Moreover, every school, and every instructor is different. I'm sure that, just as you can find MMA guys who are very sport oriented, you can also find many who are quite aware of self defense concerns who address and train for that context.

MMA is a sport, and gyms that teach MMA do generally train for sport. There are self-defense concerns that don't exist in the sport, just as there are concerns in the sport that don't factor in to self defense. But the points you draw from this strike me as mistaken and a bit naive, respectfully! I'm also a Wing Chun guy, and haven't done MMA, and so I can't argue your points from knowledgeable perspective. But I think that, if you want to argue these points yourself, you should train MMA in addition to other arts, so you know exactly what you're talking about. I think that, if you do that, you'll both improve your Wing Chun and perspective of self-defense, as well as being able to knowledgeably address concerns about where some sports training may fall short in a self defense context.

Without first hand knowledge and experience, though, it's probably not a good idea to try to argue about any aspect of this or that art


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jun 24, 2015)

Argus said:


> I would be careful commenting about things that I haven't trained. Often, your impressions as an outsider are not very accurate. Moreover, every school, and every instructor is different. I'm sure that, just as you can find MMA guys who are very sport oriented, you can also find many who are quite aware of self defense concerns who address and train for that context.
> 
> MMA is a sport, and gyms that teach MMA do generally train for sport. There are self-defense concerns that don't exist in the sport, just as there are concerns in the sport that don't factor in to self defense. But the points you draw from this strike me as mistaken and a bit naive, respectfully! I'm also a Wing Chun guy, and haven't done MMA, and so I can't argue your points from knowledgeable perspective. But I think that, if you want to argue these points yourself, you should train MMA in addition to other arts, so you know exactly what you're talking about. I think that, if you do that, you'll both improve your Wing Chun and perspective of self-defense, as well as being able to knowledgeably address concerns about where some sports training may fall short in a self defense context.
> 
> Without first hand knowledge and experience, though, it's probably not a good idea to try to argue about any aspect of this or that art


Oh come on! If we don't make sweeping generalizations about arts we have no personal experience with, then how are we supposed to start epic flame wars that stretch for 60 pages?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 24, 2015)

Whenever people think there is difference between "sport" and "SD", I always like to put up this picture.

Is this "sport" or "SD"?


----------



## marques (Jun 27, 2015)

> They [MMA techniques] can be put in for self defence purposes.


Ok... but there is a huge situational distance and a lot of work to close the gap. And self-defence is much more than fight and fitness...

SD is not a points or KO fight, is reasonable force (or no force/conflict/fight at the best).
SD is not entertainment fight, is about avoiding fighting (with intelligence) and finishing fighting (with reasonable force).
(...)


----------



## marques (Jun 27, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Whenever people think there is difference between "sport" and "SD", I always like to put up this picture.
> 
> Is this "sport" or "SD"?



Sport event? 
YES >> "sport" 
NO >> SD or* violence*. The situation or the judge will decide...


----------



## drop bear (Jun 27, 2015)

marques said:


> Ok... but there is a huge situational distance and a lot of work to close the gap. And self-defence is much more than fight and fitness...
> 
> SD is not a points or KO fight, is reasonable force (or no force/conflict/fight at the best).
> SD is not entertainment fight, is about avoiding fighting (with intelligence) and finishing fighting (with reasonable force).
> (...)



And you think those options are not part of a sporting system?


----------



## MaxRob (Jun 27, 2015)

Self defense I agree with many above is highly situational.
As a result experience twards avoidance of conflict and awareness plays a magior role.
When it comes to the inevitable conflict you may win or loose, this is best  avoided.


----------



## Danny T (Jun 27, 2015)

wingchunguy said:


> No! MMA gyms teach SPORT, not SELF DEFENSE! Though you can use it on the streets against inexperienced fighters, drunk and thugs, against REAL opponents, it is USELESS! This is because the sports applications have been watered down to exclude moves that might save your life one day. All the nasty moves that could cause serious damage to your opponent is left out. You also have to take into account the fact that they fight with gloves, timers, referees and doctors on call. Sports applications fall short in reality.


Not able to agree with you here sir.
Several 'MMA' gyms/training centers in my area who do teach self-defense with in their training. My school have an amateur and professional fighter programs for Muay Thai and MMA. Twice a month we do self-defense scenario training. The individuals are very intelligent and they know the differences in sport and self defensive actions.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 28, 2015)

marques said:


> SD is not a points or KO fight, is reasonable force (or no force/conflict/fight at the best).


If your opponent tries to knock you out, will it be better to knock him out first? To be kind to your enemy is to be cruel to yourself. Self-defense or not, when you decide to fight, you still have to act like a tiger and eat your opponent alive.

The best enemy is the enemy who no longer be able to bother you.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jun 30, 2015)

Danny T said:


> There numerous threads concerning self-defense with most all on fighting, fighting back, and/or about one system being better vs some other system.
> But what is self-defense? Is it fighting or is it much more? Most all MA schools, gyms...etc claim to teach self-defense; do they?
> What is self-defense???


My understanding of self defense is pretty basic... if someone attacks you, defend yourself non violently if possible, if not, hurt that person to the extent that he/she is no longer capable of hurting you. I got robbed at gunpoint several years ago, the dude had a rifle and he was standing 8 feet away. I could have been the best martial artist in the world, but still not able to dodge bullets. Self defense can involve mace, it can involve tazers, and it can involve knives and guns. Yes, different martial arts schools claim to teach self defense, and most of them do... to varying degree. Of all the martial arts, I think Krav Maga may be the best for self defense on the street. Interestingly, despite its dominance in the octagon, Brazilian Jiujitsu has its weaknesses on the street. If the only martial art you know is BJJ, and you get attacked by multiple people, you're f***ed. Plus if someone wanted to fight dirty like say, grab your balls, they may be able to counter your attempt for a submission hold. In the Octagon, grappling martial arts dominate, but on the street, striking martial arts are usually the best way to go. Of course, this is all just my opinion I am not a martial arts expert.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> In the Octagon, grappling martial arts dominate,



If you only watch one promotion the UFC you may think that perhaps, however in many fights it's equal between striking and grappling and in even more fights it doesn't actually go to ground. It depends on individual fighters. I'm very wary of finding correlation between what happens in MMA fights and what happens in self defence situations.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> In the Octagon, grappling martial arts dominate,


You should do some research. Take a good look at the persons who are in the champion positions as well as those who are the top contenders you may well be surprised to find most are strikers and are winning by striking. This is not to say they don't grapple for they do but most are winning not by grappling but striking. Many grapplers are utilizing much more striking in their game. In the UFC of the champions only 4 have won their last fights by grappling. The other 6 have won by striking or a combination of both. Only 4 grappling submissions of the present champions of the octagon.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

Danny T said:


> You should do some research. Take a good look at the persons who are in the champion positions as well as those who are the top contenders you may well be surprised to find most are strikers and are winning by striking. This is not to say they don't grapple for they do but most are winning not by grappling but striking. Many grapplers are utilizing much more striking in their game. In the UFC of the champions only 4 have won their last fights by grappling. The other 6 have won by striking or a combination of both. Only 4 grappling submissions of the present champions of the octagon.


yeah I'm no expert on UFC haven't watched it in a while. maybe grappling doesn't always dominate, but from what i've seen, if a grappler takes down someone who doesn't have any grappling skills, the fight is over


----------



## Steve (Jul 1, 2015)

I'd really caution everyone to avoid drawing any real conclusions about striking vs grappling in professional MMA.  At the professional level, particularly when you're talking about guys at the elite level of the UFC, they are all above average strikers AND grapplers. While some are better than others in a particular area, it's relative to a group of elite level athletes who are all above average. 

As a result, you can't say that grappling or striking dominates.  Strikers are also grapplers, and vice versa.  May not have started out that way as a base, but that's where they all end up.  Anyone seen Rhonda Rousey's striking lately?


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

Steve said:


> I'd really caution everyone to avoid drawing any real conclusions about striking vs grappling in professional MMA.  At the professional level, particularly when you're talking about guys at the elite level of the UFC, they are all above average strikers AND grapplers. While some are better than others in a particular area, it's relative to a group of elite level athletes who are all above average.
> 
> As a result, you can't say that grappling or striking dominates.  Strikers are also grapplers, and vice versa.  May not have started out that way as a base, but that's where they all end up.  Anyone seen Rhonda Rousey's striking lately?


I agree with what you say for the most part, but aren't there people who only strike, and people who only grapple? I saw a match between a kick boxer and another guy, and the announcer said the kick boxer had no grappling skills. he lost due to a submission grab btw. but i don't want to get back into that, i'm not trying to say that striking is weak or something. i mean my martial art is Taekwondo, a striking martial art, although there is some grappling in TKD, the emphasis is most definitely on striking, or kicking in the case of TKD (although we do a lot more punching than most people would think a TKD dojang does)


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> yeah I'm no expert on UFC haven't watched it in a while. maybe grappling doesn't always dominate, but from what i've seen, if a grappler takes down someone who doesn't have any grappling skills, the fight is over



And if a striker pounds on someone with no striking skills, the fight is over.

Balance... it's a great idea...


----------



## Danny T (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> In the Octagon, grappling martial arts dominate,


In post #70 you stated the above.
The only MMA organization that uses the Octagon is the UFC. They own the exclusive rights to "The Octagon" and the eight-sided cage design are registered trademarks, trademarks, trade dress or service marks owned exclusively by Zuffa. So when you say Octagon in reference to MMA you are referencing UFC.


sinthetik_mistik said:


> yeah I'm no expert on UFC haven't watched it in a while. maybe grappling doesn't always dominate, but from what i've seen, if a grappler takes down someone who doesn't have any grappling skills, the fight is over


But you stated this about someone in the UFC and in the Octagon. There are no fighters in that level of fighting without good grappling or striking skills.


sinthetik_mistik said:


> I agree with what you say for the most part, but aren't there people who only strike, and people who only grapple?


Again the context of the conversation at this point is about the UFC. At the level one must be to compete in an UFC event the fighter has very good striking and grappling skills. Not just one or the other.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

Danny T said:


> In post #70 you stated the above.
> The only MMA organization that uses the Octagon is the UFC. They own the exclusive rights to "The Octagon" and the eight-sided cage design are registered trademarks, trademarks, trade dress or service marks owned exclusively by Zuffa. So when you say Octagon in reference to MMA you are referencing UFC.
> 
> But you stated this about someone in the UFC and in the Octagon. There are no fighters in that level of fighting without good grappling or striking skills.
> ...


I thought WEC also used an Octagon


Danny T said:


> In post #70 you stated the above.
> The only MMA organization that uses the Octagon is the UFC. They own the exclusive rights to "The Octagon" and the eight-sided cage design are registered trademarks, trademarks, trade dress or service marks owned exclusively by Zuffa. So when you say Octagon in reference to MMA you are referencing UFC.
> 
> But you stated this about someone in the UFC and in the Octagon. There are no fighters in that level of fighting without good grappling or striking skills.
> ...


Yes, I already knew that the Octagon is the arena for UFC. From the fights I've watched, and this is just my opinion, it seems to me that every fighter in UFC has his specialty, (yes i'm aware that UFC fighters usually have at least 3-4 black belts) but to me it seems like they all their specialty. Often times from the fights i've seen the announcers will comment on which martial arts the fighters truly excel at. I remember watching one fight with a guy whose specialty was boxing, and he beat the other guy into a pulp. That is one example that pops into my mind. but i do not know as much about UFC as you or a lot of people on this site so maybe i'm completely in the wrong idk


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

cancel what i said about WEC using the octagon, i don't even know if that organization still exists


----------



## Danny T (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> cancel what i said about WEC using the octagon, i don't even know if that organization still exists


The WEC began in 2001 and used a pentagonal cage. Was purchased by the Zuffa in 2006 and did use a modified (smaller) octagon until 2010 when the WEC was merged with the UFC.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

Danny T said:


> The WEC began in 2001 and used a pentagonal cage. Was purchased by the Zuffa in 2006 and did use a modified (smaller) octagon until 2010 when the WEC was merged with the UFC.


oh ok, good to know thanks


----------



## Steve (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> I agree with what you say for the most part, but aren't there people who only strike, and people who only grapple? I saw a match between a kick boxer and another guy, and the announcer said the kick boxer had no grappling skills. he lost due to a submission grab btw. but i don't want to get back into that, i'm not trying to say that striking is weak or something. i mean my martial art is Taekwondo, a striking martial art, although there is some grappling in TKD, the emphasis is most definitely on striking, or kicking in the case of TKD (although we do a lot more punching than most people would think a TKD dojang does)


Maybe in a local promotion, particularly at the amateur level.  But even a guy with "no grappling skills" in the UFC (or any other elite level organization) will have above average grappling skills. At that level, with that degree of physicality and fitness, and the intensity of their training, a blue belt in BJJ who is also a professional MMA fighter is going to be a handful.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

Steve said:


> Maybe in a local promotion, particularly at the amateur level.  But even a guy with "no grappling skills" in the UFC (or any other elite level organization) will have above average grappling skills. At that level, with that degree of physicality and fitness, and the intensity of their training, a blue belt in BJJ who is also a professional MMA fighter is going to be a handful.


so in order to be a good MMA fighter at the UFC level, you have to master grappling and striking both? i'm not trying to disagree with you but in my opinion no two fighters have the exact same skill sets. Some UFC fighters are superb boxers, some are superb grapplers, and so on and so forth. everyone tells me that all UFC fighters are total masters in all areas... and i'm not entirely trying to disagree, but i think each individual UFC fighter has his individual area(s) of expertise


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> so in order to be a good MMA fighter at the UFC level, you have to master grappling and striking both? i'm not trying to disagree with you but in my opinion no two fighters have the exact same skill sets. Some UFC fighters are superb boxers, some are superb grapplers, and so on and so forth. everyone tells me that all UFC fighters are total masters in all areas... and i'm not entirely trying to disagree, but i think each individual UFC fighter has his individual area(s) of expertise



Not in the least, and anyone making such a claim should be subject to a grand round of finger pointing and laughing.
MMA competitors need to have a solid grounding in striking and grappling. But each one will have their own personal preferences and areas with greater expertise. Some are known as strong punchers. Some as strong kickers. Some as strong grapplers.
Masters in all areas? That's absurd.


----------



## Steve (Jul 1, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> so in order to be a good MMA fighter at the UFC level, you have to master grappling and striking both? i'm not trying to disagree with you but in my opinion no two fighters have the exact same skill sets. Some UFC fighters are superb boxers, some are superb grapplers, and so on and so forth. everyone tells me that all UFC fighters are total masters in all areas... and i'm not entirely trying to disagree, but i think each individual UFC fighter has his individual area(s) of expertise


Master of both grappling and striking...  Yes.   Relative to most people, they are proficient at all ranges of the sport.   Relative to each other, some are better at some ranges.  The worst ufc fighter is still top 1%.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 1, 2015)

Steve said:


> Master of both grappling and striking...  Yes.   Relative to most people, they are proficient at all ranges of the sport.   Relative to each other, some are better at some ranges.  The worst ufc fighter is still top 1%.



I see the above as self-contradictory. There is a *vast* difference between mastery and proficiency.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Not in the least, and anyone making such a claim should be subject to a grand round of finger pointing and laughing.
> MMA competitors need to have a solid grounding in striking and grappling. But each one will have their own personal preferences and areas with greater expertise. Some are known as strong punchers. Some as strong kickers. Some as strong grapplers.
> Masters in all areas? That's absurd.


maybe if you train 20 hours a day for 50 years lol


----------



## Steve (Jul 1, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> I see the above as self-contradictory. There is a *vast* difference between mastery and proficiency.


It's relative.   A professional MMA fighter at that level is at a completely different level of proficiency than Just about anyone else.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 1, 2015)

Steve said:


> It's relative.   A professional MMA fighter at that level is at a completely different level of proficiency than Just about anyone else.


people are probably going to attack me in droves for saying this, but this is just my opinion, nothing more. Agree to disagree. i have watched a decent amount of UFC and i think their mastery might be a little overstated. yes, they are great fighters, but (once again in my opinion) they are not grandmasters by any stretch. one thing to their benefit is a lot of them, especially the heavier weight classes, are quite muscular. it is a no brainer that being muscular increases your fighting proficiency by a *lot*. so they are all around great fighters, i am not trying to say that they are not... and once in a while i'll see a UFC move that makes me go "woah" but maybe i'm wrong. i'm really not qualified to talk on this subject, as i have no background in MMA, so i hope no one executes me for saying this


----------



## Steve (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> maybe if you train 20 hours a day for 50 years lol


Nonsense.  If you combine the genetic tools these guys have with the hours they put into training each week, it isn't a stretch.   Think about how many hours you train.   


sinthetik_mistik said:


> people are probably going to attack me in droves for saying this, but this is just my opinion, nothing more. Agree to disagree. i have watched a decent amount of UFC and i think their mastery might be a little overstated. yes, they are great fighters, but (once again in my opinion) they are not grandmasters by any stretch. one thing to their benefit is a lot of them, especially the heavier weight classes, are quite muscular. it is a no brainer that being muscular increases your fighting proficiency by a *lot*. so they are all around great fighters, i am not trying to say that they are not... and once in a while i'll see a UFC move that makes me go "woah" but maybe i'm wrong. i'm really not qualified to talk on this subject, as i have no background in MMA, so i hope no one executes me for saying this


lol.  No ones going to get on you for stating your opinion.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

Steve said:


> Nonsense.  If you combine the genetic tools these guys have with the hours they put into training each week, it isn't a stretch.   Think about how many hours you train.
> 
> lol.  No ones going to get on you for stating your opinion.


yeah the whole training for 50 years thing was just a dumb joke.

I'd be lying if i didn't see people on this site going at it with each other due to the fact that they have conflicting opinions. maybe its just the way  people talk on this site: harsh


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> people are probably going to attack me in droves for saying this, but this is just my opinion, nothing more. Agree to disagree. i have watched a decent amount of UFC and i think their mastery might be a little overstated. yes, they are great fighters, but (once again in my opinion) they are not grandmasters by any stretch. one thing to their benefit is a lot of them, especially the heavier weight classes, are quite muscular. it is a no brainer that being muscular increases your fighting proficiency by a *lot*. so they are all around great fighters, i am not trying to say that they are not... and once in a while i'll see a UFC move that makes me go "woah" but maybe i'm wrong. i'm really not qualified to talk on this subject, as i have no background in MMA, so i hope no one executes me for saying this




I have seen thousands of MMA fights live on many different promotions, the MMA fighters you see on the UFC are professional fighters, they do nothing else but train. This will be conditioning, tactics, ground work and stand up several hours a day. They aren't grandmasters of any style other than MMA, it's what they do after all isn't it? You don't compare what they do to other styles, they are professional MMA fighters, they are masters of MMA.
You don't see 'UFC' moves btw you see MMA moves, to keep saying that the fighting  you are watching is UFC when you mean MMA is misleading, those moves will be done in MA fights all over the world on many different companies fight nights. it's a running joke in the MMA world that the wannabes say they 'train UFC'


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I have seen thousands of MMA fights live on many different promotions, the MMA fighters you see on the UFC are professional fighters, they do nothing else but train. This will be conditioning, tactics, ground work and stand up several hours a day. They aren't grandmasters of any style other than MMA, it's what they do after all isn't it? You don't compare what they do to other styles, they are professional MMA fighters, they are masters of MMA.
> You don't see 'UFC' moves btw you see MMA moves, to keep saying that the fighting  you are watching is UFC when you mean MMA is misleading, those moves will be done in MA fights all over the world on many different companies fight nights. it's a running joke in the MMA world that the wannabes say they 'train UFC'



yeah its interesting i always wondered how UFC fighters, many of whom are not from wealthy backgrounds, can afford to train on such a high level. I had a former champion kickboxing friend training people one on one for 70 dollars an hour. I was looking at some TKD one on one trainers and they were like 100 dollars an hour. maybe there is some obvious answer staring me in the face and i'm dumb not to see it, but yeah... the impressive thing about MMA fighters is just that, mixed martial arts, getting one black belt is hard, but getting 4-5 black belts is 4-5 times harder. maybe i'm unclear on how MMA fighters train, i'm no expert in MMA, do they blend all the styles together while training or do they alternate?


----------



## Buka (Jul 2, 2015)

Watching anything is an interesting hobby, as observers we tend to put ourselves into the action scenario mentally. It's fun and when done subconciously we sometimes build up enough "watching time" to feel like we know what we would do. It's like watching a good Tae-kwon-do kicker if you've never fought and thinking "I'd block that kick, it wouldn't hit me." Then, if you were actually standing there and the damn kick came _down on_ you instead of _up at_ you, you wouldn't even realize it because you would have already been kicked a couple times and things would look funny.....and everyone would seem taller....because you'ld be on your back and not even realize it.

Or watching a good grappler if you've never grappled and thinking "why doesn't that guy just do such and such, I would." No, you wouldn't, you might want to, but when you moved to do it you'ld place yourself right into that ugly submission that you haven't had the pleasure of watching yet from your couch. Or watching a wing chun guy trapping a guys arm and thinking "I'd just move my arm over there" which is where he wants you to move your arm as he punches you in the face and traps both your arms and smiles.

If you can find a place with a cage - lay on the mat, right against the fence. Then just get up. It's as easy as pie. Then have someone pin you there. Someone who knows what he's doing. If you haven't packed a lunch bag you'll starve to death. You'll never be able to get up, and if he brings the rain....well, you know. Or don't.

Speaking of which, did anyone watch TUF last night? Very interesting and controversial fight. Here's the vid, not great quality, looks like a tv vid, but watchable. Only one round. Damn!


----------



## Hanzou (Jul 2, 2015)

Holy heck Buka, that was a sick fight. I loved that grappling reversal leading to the RNC. 

Looks like I need to start watching TUF again.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 2, 2015)

Excellent performance of surviving and recovering from the onslaught after being kicked in the groin.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> yeah its interesting i always wondered how UFC fighters, many of whom are not from wealthy backgrounds, can afford to train on such a high level. I had a former champion kickboxing friend training people one on one for 70 dollars an hour. I was looking at some TKD one on one trainers and they were like 100 dollars an hour. maybe there is some obvious answer staring me in the face and i'm dumb not to see it, but yeah... the impressive thing about MMA fighters is just that, mixed martial arts, getting one black belt is hard, but getting 4-5 black belts is 4-5 times harder. maybe i'm unclear on how MMA fighters train, i'm no expert in MMA, do they blend all the styles together while training or do they alternate?




This is how they train The Griphouse - MMA Gym Glasgow - Dinky Ninja Fight Team

Tillery Combat MMA Academy Page 1.

Predators MMA Manchester

SBG Ireland

and my gym is the same.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

Buka said:


> Watching anything is an interesting hobby, as observers we tend to put ourselves into the action scenario mentally. It's fun and when done subconciously we sometimes build up enough "watching time" to feel like we know what we would do. It's like watching a good Tae-kwon-do kicker if you've never fought and thinking "I'd block that kick, it wouldn't hit me." Then, if you were actually standing there and the damn kick came _down on_ you instead of _up at_ you, you wouldn't even realize it because you would have already been kicked a couple times and things would look funny.....and everyone would seem taller....because you'ld be on your back and not even realize it.
> 
> Or watching a good grappler if you've never grappled and thinking "why doesn't that guy just do such and such, I would." No, you wouldn't, you might want to, but when you moved to do it you'ld place yourself right into that ugly submission that you haven't had the pleasure of watching yet from your couch. Or watching a wing chun guy trapping a guys arm and thinking "I'd just move my arm over there" which is where he wants you to move your arm as he punches you in the face and traps both your arms and smiles.
> 
> ...



I am a decent fighter, not a great fighter, but a decent fighter. I am well aware that if I went into the UFC Octagon I would get the living s*** beat out of me. I am no match for any of them. As Tez 3 stated, training is all they do. I train for Taekwondo but not nonstop from dawn till dusk. Even if I did TKD is one martial art and they are proficient in at least 3-4 martial arts so I'd still prob get my *** handed to me unless I managed to do a one kick knockout or something like that.  I couldn't see that video you posted because it was blocked by UFC on copyright grounds.  I will say that I have seen fighters on UFC really shine on the ground.  Like Stephen Bonnar, for instance, one of my favorite UFC fighters, he reversed a submission grab in a manner that I can only describe as masterful. I've also seen UFC fighters shine in striking... this one boxer I saw recently did some ridonkulous punching, beat the other dude into oblivion.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> I am a decent fighter, not a great fighter, but a decent fighter. I am well aware that if I went into the UFC Octagon I would get the living s*** beat out of me. I am no match for any of them. As Tez 3 stated, training is all they do. I train for Taekwondo but not nonstop from dawn till dusk. Even if I did TKD is one martial art and they are proficient in at least 3-4 martial arts so I'd still prob get my *** handed to me unless I managed to do a one kick knockout or something like that.  I couldn't see that video you posted because it was blocked by UFC on copyright grounds.  I will say that I have seen fighters on UFC really shine on the ground.  Like Stephen Bonnar, for instance, one of my favorite UFC fighters, he reversed a submission grab in a manner that I can only describe as masterful. I've also seen UFC fighters shine in striking... this one boxer I saw recently did some ridonkulous punching, beat the other dude into oblivion.




If you fancied trying a fight there are plenty of other promotions around, many will also have amateur and semi pro as well as pro rules . Some promotions specialise in taking first timers. There are a huge amount of people who train MMA with no intention of fighting, some like to have a fight once or twice a year. It's isn't all professional fighters in MMA lots of non professional fighters have a go, some are very good, some just average but all enjoy fighting on shows.
Fighters aren't necessarily proficient in 3-4 martial arts, they are proficient in MMA there's a difference, they don't train in a whole loads of different styles then compete, they learn and practice the techniques needed to fight. In the early days, fighters would be black belts mostly likely in one style then train another, now more and more are coming into MMA without having done any martial arts.
I don't know why you are surprised that MMA fighters are good at striking, it's a very big part of MMA. In fact I'm not sure you are very clear what MMA is?


----------



## Steve (Jul 2, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> If you fancied trying a fight there are plenty of other promotions around, many will also have amateur and semi pro as well as pro rules . Some promotions specialise in taking first timers. There are a huge amount of people who train MMA with no intention of fighting, some like to have a fight once or twice a year. It's isn't all professional fighters in MMA lots of non professional fighters have a go, some are very good, some just average but all enjoy fighting on shows.
> Fighters aren't necessarily proficient in 3-4 martial arts, they are proficient in MMA there's a difference, they don't train in a whole loads of different styles then compete, they learn and practice the techniques needed to fight. In the early days, fighters would be black belts mostly likely in one style then train another, now more and more are coming into MMA without having done any martial arts.
> I don't know why you are surprised that MMA fighters are good at striking, it's a very big part of MMA. In fact I'm not sure you are very clear what MMA is?


 Well, I think that's not always true.  Many MMA gyms have strength training, BJJ/Sub Wrestling, Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai and also MMA.  It's not uncommon to have athletes training each area independently alongside their MMA training.  They may even compete in various disciplines, as well.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> If you fancied trying a fight there are plenty of other promotions around, many will also have amateur and semi pro as well as pro rules . Some promotions specialise in taking first timers. There are a huge amount of people who train MMA with no intention of fighting, some like to have a fight once or twice a year. It's isn't all professional fighters in MMA lots of non professional fighters have a go, some are very good, some just average but all enjoy fighting on shows.
> Fighters aren't necessarily proficient in 3-4 martial arts, they are proficient in MMA there's a difference, they don't train in a whole loads of different styles then compete, they learn and practice the techniques needed to fight. In the early days, fighters would be black belts mostly likely in one style then train another, now more and more are coming into MMA without having done any martial arts.
> I don't know why you are surprised that MMA fighters are good at striking, it's a very big part of MMA. In fact I'm not sure you are very clear what MMA is?



well, I know that MMA stands for mixed martial arts.  I don't remember saying I was surprised to see UFC fighters excelling in striking. On the contrary, I would damn well expect it. I am not an expert in MMA as far as how they train. Do they meld all the different martial arts together into one comprehensive martial art? (as opposed to training for each individual martial art separately) that is what i'm assuming from what everyone has told me. so yeah you're right i'm no expert on MMA, i've watched a fair amount of UFC, and observed the way people on UFC fight, but beyond that i am pretty ignorant about MMA


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> I've also seen UFC fighters shine in striking... .



That certainly sounds surprised!

MMA is a competitive style of martial arts, fighters compete under an MMA rule set which may often vary from promotion to promotion. In the US it tends to be more controlled by authorities than anywhere else.
They don't meld all the different arts into one, they take what they need out of whatever style they feel is useful. Often fighters will train in a stand up style, Muay Thai is very popular for that, other may use their experience in karate/TKD/TSD and train that, ground styles are usually BJJ but may be Sambo or Judo. However it will all to trained with the intent of being used in an MMA fight, this means only using techniques they feel are useful, they can come from any style. I have seen fighters who were competing against each and after the fight be in the changing room swapping techniques. Every fighter knows who their opponent will be so they have a chance to study them, the fight tactics will be worked out accordingly.
 I would say look wider than the UFC, watch your local shows, actually go to one even, look on You Tube for the Pride fights, sadly no longer going but it had great fights in it's day. Look at Bellator and other shows, expand beyond UFC.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> That certainly sounds surprised!
> 
> MMA is a competitive style of martial arts, fighters compete under an MMA rule set which may often vary from promotion to promotion. In the US it tends to be more controlled by authorities than anywhere else.
> They don't meld all the different arts into one, they take what they need out of whatever style they feel is useful. Often fighters will train in a stand up style, Muay Thai is very popular for that, other may use their experience in karate/TKD/TSD and train that, ground styles are usually BJJ but may be Sambo or Judo. However it will all to trained with the intent of being used in an MMA fight, this means only using techniques they feel are useful, they can come from any style. I have seen fighters who were competing against each and after the fight be in the changing room swapping techniques. Every fighter knows who their opponent will be so they have a chance to study them, the fight tactics will be worked out accordingly.
> I would say look wider than the UFC, watch your local shows, actually go to one even, look on You Tube for the Pride fights, sadly no longer going but it had great fights in it's day. Look at Bellator and other shows, expand beyond UFC.



well i didn't mean to come across as surprised... maybe i didn't word my message well. The fact that one of the biggest, most highly acclaimed fighting competitions on planet earth has fighters that are damn good strikers truly doesn't surprise me. I have watched a lot of fights on Youtube, mainly TKD fights at first but all different styles and have seen a variety of scenarios. I have watched a TKD guy knock out a Muay Thai guy with one kick, and I have watched a Muay Thai guy beat a TKD guy into submission. I actually saw one fight between a TKD guy and a Muay Thai guy that resulted in a draw, after the bell rang and the fight was over they both laid down on the ground and clutched themselves, obviously in serious pain. I am just using those two martial arts as examples. I saw on Aikido master dominate like everybody but i can't find those videos.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> well i didn't mean to come across as surprised... maybe i didn't word my message well. The fact that one of the biggest, most highly acclaimed fighting competitions on planet earth has fighters that are damn good strikers truly doesn't surprise me. I have watched a lot of fights on Youtube, mainly TKD fights at first but all different styles and have seen a variety of scenarios. I have watched a TKD guy knock out a Muay Thai guy with one kick, and I have watched a Muay Thai guy beat a TKD guy into submission. I actually saw one fight between a TKD guy and a Muay Thai guy that resulted in a draw, after the bell rang and the fight was over they both laid down on the ground and clutched themselves, obviously in serious pain. I am just using those two martial arts as examples. I saw on Aikido master dominate like everybody but i can't find those videos.




You Tube videos as far as martial arts are concerned are dubious to say the least. Everyone and their monkey posts 'fights' up, a few are good the vast majority don't represent the styles very well. I don't watch these so called style v style videos, they need to be watched with an enormous pinch of salt, they are laughable frankly.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 2, 2015)

Late at night here so I'm off to bed but here's a taste of what a master looks like lol, Crocop of the dead eyes.


----------



## RowdyAz (Jul 2, 2015)

Right leg hospital, left leg cemetery


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Late at night here so I'm off to bed but here's a taste of what a master looks like lol, Crocop of the dead eyes.



awesome fight, thanks for sharing! i think the fact that they didn't like each other made them fight harder, but maybe not. Knockout due to a kick to the head is my favorite kind of knockout... you see it in TKD all the time... i'll post a video here to demonstrate... this is a YouTube video so you can tell me if you think it's dubious:


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> awesome fight, thanks for sharing! i think the fact that they didn't like each other made them fight harder, but maybe not. Knockout due to a kick to the head is my favorite kind of knockout... you see it in TKD all the time... i'll post a video here to demonstrate... this is a YouTube video so you can tell me if you think it's dubious:


also notice the fact that they are wearing protective headgear. doing a kick to the head knockout is fierce enough without protective headgear, so obviously with headgear it is even more ferocious.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> also notice the fact that they are wearing protective headgear. doing a kick to the head knockout is fierce enough without protective headgear, so obviously with headgear it is even more ferocious.




Well, no it's not more ferocious, it's the same.


 Crocop fought everyone like that, he is cold and ruthless, look him up, his name is Mirko Filipović.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Well, no it's not more ferocious, it's the same.



ok... so if you are saying that it is the same, that is implying that headgear does not provide protection? if it does not provide protection... then why are they wearing it? if you can hurt someone who is wearing protective padding just as easily as someone who is not wearing protective padding then what is the point of wearing protective padding?


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 2, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> ok... so if you are saying that it is the same, that is implying that headgear does not provide protection? if it does not provide protection... then why are they wearing it? if you can hurt someone who is wearing protective padding just as easily as someone who is not wearing protective padding then what is the point of wearing protective padding?



I mean in TKD matches you are not allowed to punch the head of your opponent. So that means that the fighters are wearing protective headgear to protect themselves from kicks...  i have sparred TKD before, I punched someone who had protective padding on their chest and they were fine... and i'm not trying to toot my horn but i'm a pretty solid puncher


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 3, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> ok... so if you are saying that it is the same, that is implying that headgear does not provide protection? if it does not provide protection... then why are they wearing it? if you can hurt someone who is wearing protective padding just as easily as someone who is not wearing protective padding then what is the point of wearing protective padding?




The damage caused by any blow to the head happens when the soft brain hits the hard skull, it causes bruising and sometimes bleeding. There is no external padding that can stop that happening. Motorcycle helmets for example provide external protection and often save lives but you always get that brain hitting the inside of the skull damage. Boxers are the worst for it because they often dehydrate to make weight  and lose the protecting fluid around the brain. Same with jockeys. Football (soccer) players sustain brain damage from repeated heading the ball. this damage is often known as being punch drunk. Amateur boxing has just stopped using head guards for male boxers.
Sports Medicine Punch Drunk Repetitive Brain Injury - The Doctor


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Motorcycle helmets for example provide external protection and often save lives but you always get that brain hitting the inside of the skull damage



Yes, there always is the brain hitting the inside of the skull, but doesn't the head gear absorb much of the shock? I'm no expert but to I would think that lessens the intensity of the blow. I may be wrong cause i'm really no expert but if motorcycle helmet saves lives but doesn't do anything to alleviate the degree to which the brain hits the inside of the skull... the leading cause of head injuries from a motorcycle crash is traumatic brain injury... so I am guessing that is what wearing a helmet is designed to protect. i'm not saying it completely takes away all the blow, but it decreases it. Like you said, motorcycles save lives largely from brain injury, so yeah i'm going around in circles now but yeah


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 3, 2015)

sinthetik_mistik said:


> Yes, there always is the brain hitting the inside of the skull, but doesn't the head gear absorb much of the shock? I'm no expert but to I would think that lessens the intensity of the blow. I may be wrong cause i'm really no expert but if motorcycle helmet saves lives but doesn't do anything to alleviate the degree to which the brain hits the inside of the skull... the leading cause of head injuries from a motorcycle crash is traumatic brain injury... so I am guessing that is what wearing a helmet is designed to protect. i'm not saying it completely takes away all the blow, but it decreases it. Like you said, motorcycles save lives largely from brain injury, so yeah i'm going around in circles now but yeah




The brain still moves inside the skull, there's nothing can protect it from that. It's the movements of the brain that does the damage not the blow itself. If you imagine the whiplash type of injury where your head goes suddenly forward and then sudden backward, the brain is bouncing odd the skull, you can't mitigate that with a helmet, the brain still moves as it does with a blow to the head, a relatively shallow hit will still cause the brain to move within the skull. The motorcycle helmet protects the skull not the brain. If the skull fractures and pierces the brain you have big problems.


----------



## sinthetik_mistik (Jul 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> The brain still moves inside the skull, there's nothing can protect it from that. It's the movements of the brain that does the damage not the blow itself. If you imagine the whiplash type of injury where your head goes suddenly forward and then sudden backward, the brain is bouncing odd the skull, you can't mitigate that with a helmet, the brain still moves as it does with a blow to the head, a relatively shallow hit will still cause the brain to move within the skull. The motorcycle helmet protects the skull not the brain. If the skull fractures and pierces the brain you have big problems.



well i'll confess, you obviously have more knowledge about this subject than me. I always assumed that headgear makes it harder to knock someone out with a kick to the head but i guess i was wrong. Nonetheless, i think a one kick knockout to the head is still damn impressive.


----------



## Crazy Eyes (Jul 3, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> The brain still moves inside the skull, there's nothing can protect it from that. It's the movements of the brain that does the damage not the blow itself. If you imagine the whiplash type of injury where your head goes suddenly forward and then sudden backward, the brain is bouncing odd the skull, you can't mitigate that with a helmet, the brain still moves as it does with a blow to the head, a relatively shallow hit will still cause the brain to move within the skull. The motorcycle helmet protects the skull not the brain. If the skull fractures and pierces the brain you have big problems.


I'm not sure if I agree with you on this.  As someone who has taken multiple strikes to the head and more than a couple concussions, I can confidently say I've suffered no brain damage at all.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 4, 2015)

Crazy Eyes said:


> I'm not sure if I agree with you on this.  As someone who has taken multiple strikes to the head and more than a couple concussions, I can confidently say I've suffered no brain damage at all.



Sorry. You're wrong. If you've had multiple concussions, then, by definition, you've got brain damage.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 4, 2015)

Crazy Eyes said:


> I'm not sure if I agree with you on this.  As someone who has taken multiple strikes to the head and more than a couple concussions, I can confidently say I've suffered no brain damage at all.




Doesn't matter whether you agree with ME or not, it's medical evidence ( there is a lot of it too), you can ignore it or not it will still be true.

It's something we in the MMA field in the UK are very interested in, safety for participants so there's a lot of research been done into the medical aspects of brain damage and hit strikes.


----------



## Bluesman (Nov 14, 2015)

To me all that matters in a self defense situation is that you and your friends & family get home safely. That may involve fighting, talking, avoiding or running. They are all forms of self defense.


----------



## banshee Ian Williams (Dec 4, 2015)

Self defense, its either, the defense of oneself, or in many cases it seems to become, the art of proper retaliation and quick evasion. 
The best defense is 'no be there' to be corny. 
To truly defend oneself one needs to be focused, or otherwise it turns into foolish aggression. 
Hurry up and slow down.


----------

