# Would this work?



## PhotonGuy

Would this work? I might do things different in this situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA6QoqCJ6UU&list=UUD4dMBQ079UezL-QbmXSj_Q


----------



## Dirty Dog

Like any technique, the answer is and always will be "maybe". Everything is circumstantial and what works on occasion A may not work during very similar occasion B.

To my mind, one of the indicators that a person should be considered a beginner is a focus on techniques, rather than principles.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

It _could _work, depending on the circumstances.

Some things to consider ...

If the circumstances are not life-threatening (as in the scenario depicted where the opponent is reaching for a gun), then you are potentially opening yourself up for legal and moral liability issues.

If the opponent _is_ reaching for the gun, then there are a lot of ways things can go depending on how close he is to the gun, how close you are to the gun, and how close you are to the opponent and other factors besides. If you kick the opponent and fail to incapacitate him and he reaches the gun, then things may go very badly. What he shows probably wouldn't be my favored approach most of the time, but under some circumstances it might be the best option.


----------



## Zero

First I don&#8217;t know much about this Larkin guy or his true abilities other than he apparently trained as a navy seal (and was prevented from entry into the UK over his training material or some such thing), which doesn&#8217;t make him a great fighter or SD expert in itself from my own limited experience (I have fought in the ring against military and have trained with SAS and mainstream military and they are no better than any other well trained martial artists or self defence experts, in fact I have found the cops I have trained with and fought against somewhat better fighters in the scheme of things, sorry army guys!!! (and not counting my older army cousin who used to whoop on me)).  But this experience should hopefully mean he has trained in some key show-stopper techniques that have maximum effect with the minimum of expenditure and time.  If he has really spent the previous twenty years focusing on SD on top of that then he should have some good stuff to show.

That said, I have never drilled on a kick to the throat specifically when your opponent/assailant is in that position on the ground.  Also, the application of the technique seems a little sloppy and off-balance to me but that could be just because he is trying to keep it as controlled as possible, he didn&#8217;t seem the most stable of kickers in my opinion...  That doesn&#8217;t mean the technique itself ain&#8217;t gold.

If I had standard footwear, or barefoot even, I would be going with a football kick to the head for a KO decapitation.  From my own MMA (some) and kick boxing (a lot) experience and watching street fights I know these can be game-enders.  If I had boots or hard toe shoes then the ribs would also be on but if a gun was in the equation and we are focusing on a kick response only, then it would be a kick to the head.  Having kicked people in the head with multiple KOs I am comfortable with that having the result in most cases.  I have never actually kicked deliberately or by accident someone in the throat (so maybe not the best placed to judge).  To my eye and analysis, however, the neck/throat shot has too many variables, more than a head shot at least, in that position.  The target is harder to hit, the hit may not be as clean.  Also from shoulder movement, the opponent could deliberately or inadvertently deflect a lot of the shot away from the neck &#8211; that would be much harder to do if the focus is the head and if the guy&#8217;s hands are on the floor as in your video.

Another comment: he executes the kick from too close in and from an almost semi smothered position and angle.  I have trapped legs and taken down opponents when on the ground and they have come that close into me, any basic grappler or SD practitioner knows this.  I would be winding up from further out and connecting with maximum impact to the head.  I don&#8217;t buy the technique necessarily flipping the guy over like that from the way it is executed.

I&#8217;m the first to say that any technique and target can be on but this would not be a go to move I&#8217;d put in the tool-kit.  Happy to be shown the error of my ways by others more experienced with such.

Now a reverse tiger mouth throat strike to the assailant in that position, well that&#8217;s an entirely different story - but only if the &#8220;deadly force technique&#8221; application of such is used and K-Man is no longer allowed to divulge such over the net.


----------



## Zero

So what other technique would you employ PG if you have reservations with his move?


----------



## tshadowchaser

As Tony said a legal implication apply not matter what you do if he is on the ground and you are standing and free of his grasp.
Ok having said that I would also prefer a straight kick to the head or ribs instead of trying to aim for the throat.  Most people would not be able to pull off a throat strike any time they wanted. 
Would the technique as shown work.? It could or it might not.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Dirty Dog said:


> Like any technique, the answer is and always will be "maybe". Everything is circumstantial and what works on occasion A may not work during very similar occasion B.
> 
> To my mind, one of the indicators that a person should be considered a beginner is a focus on techniques, rather than principles.


Well, what I would have done is kicked his arm out from under him, and when he assumes the push up position, there you are, patiently, waiting to stomp the elbow in a direction it doesn't go.


----------



## K-man

I have no issue with what is being shown. Shin kick to the neck will at least contact the head whereas a kick to the ribs in this type of situation may not be a game ender. 


As for Tim Larkin. I like his material. I've followed it for years but much of it is directed at firearm use which is less relevant to those of us in Australia. 
:asian:


----------



## PhotonGuy

Zero said:


> So what other technique would you employ PG if you have reservations with his move?



In a situation like this I would kick the gun or stomp on his hand if he managed to get ahold of it before I was able to kick it. I would not kick to the guy's neck or head as depicted in the video as there is the possibility he could still manage to get the gun and use it in that case.


----------



## Zero

PhotonGuy said:


> In a situation like this I would kick the gun or stomp on his hand if he managed to get ahold of it before I was able to kick it. I would not kick to the guy's neck or head as depicted in the video as there is the possibility he could still manage to get the gun and use it in that case.


That's a good point and there is merit in that but I have been told by some who are far more into SD than I am that actually going for the weapon itself, depending on your own abilities and attributes, can be the wrong thing to do.  Eg, you miss the gun and it is still in play, or by focusing on the gun, even for that instant to kick it away, your assailant has been given the time to take you down/out.  Lots to think about.  I would say kicking the guy in the head is more likely than a kick to his hand. To credibly target and damage the hand, would have to be a stomp and that means you have to be right in close.  Another alternative as Touch of Death points out is kicking out the supporting arm and taking things from there but personally in that specific scenario I would still favour the head shot.


----------



## Chris Parker

PhotonGuy said:


> Would this work? I might do things different in this situation.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA6QoqCJ6UU&list=UUD4dMBQ079UezL-QbmXSj_Q



Would what work? That's actually a serious question, for the record&#8230; are you asking if a kick to the throat can "work"? Well&#8230; sure&#8230; provided you actually kick him in the throat&#8230; Is what is presented, and the way it's presented, the best/easiest/most high-return/low risk technique available there? Nope. Would I rely on it? Nope. Would I use it? Doubtful&#8230; only if the situation called for it, and the opportunity presented itself&#8230; which is actually a lot of "if's"&#8230; Would it have the result shown? That's fairly questionable, actually&#8230; 

What I will say is that, with regards to the video itself, I have a large number of issues with what's shown, from a tactical, mechanical, legal, and practical level&#8230; the kick is performed too close, which means that the leg gets very little extension, robbing it of power, and actually making it harder to get the "ring around the neck" he's talking about&#8230; as well as putting your support leg in a dangerous (grabbable) position and range&#8230; tactically, it's highly questionable&#8230; the kick to the throat, even if the guy is going for a gun, is not necessary (or even the most likely to be successful&#8230; contrary to K-Man, I would advise a kick to the ribs instead&#8230; it's a larger target, which means that you'll get a result pretty much no matter what, even if not optimal, whereas the throat is too easy to miss&#8230; it's just too easy to glance off the shoulder, or clip the forehead, which won't give too much of a result under the adrenaline that would be felt), and all the follow-up, if you've prevented him from getting the gun is plain badly advised (you've kicked him in the throat, stomped the bladder, you're over the top of him, he's no longer a threat, doesn't have the gun, and you&#8230; break his neck?). So yeah, not a fan of this. Additionally, it had nothing to do with the title of the clip itself (using body weight in self defence&#8230; uh, no)&#8230; but I think we can blame Black Belt Magazine for that one&#8230; 

What would I do? Good question&#8230; and honestly, I wouldn't know without being in the position to assess first. Ideally, though, I'd be looking to go after the guy, not the weapon (which could be done multiple ways). Exactly how? Too many options to list here.


----------



## K-man

Not often I disagree with Chris but ...

in this case there are a number of reasons why I wouldn't be targeting the ribs and I would like to read Brian's thoughts on thus one. For me the ribs are low percentage for a couple of reasons. One, the opponent may have bulky clothing on and in some situations even a heavy vest. Two, as he leans forward to grab the weapon with his right hand the left arm is in the way of the kick. You might break the arm and still not stop him reaching the gun. Three, once he has the gun he will roll away from you to bring the weapon to bear. If you are a fraction late with the kick it's all over. "Chick, chick, bang!"

So let's look to the kick to the neck. We are kicking with the left leg. A right leg kick may well be deflected but the left leg is kicking into the body mass. You might not get the neck but you will at least get the side of the head. For me that is high percentage.

And finally, number four in the reasons why I would rely on the kicks to the ribs. In this situation both persons are fighting for their life. Under adrenalin the guy going for the gun won't even feel the kick to the ribs even if it breaks them. I've broken bones in tournaments, including ribs, and not even known about it until later. A kick to the neck, jaw or side of head is likely to finish the confrontation on the spot. At very worst it with stop the movement towards the weapon.
:asian:


----------



## Tez3

Larkin was excluded from the UK because he came specifically to 'lecture' in two areas that had recently had been serious riots, he was advocating more violence so the community groups protested ( on all sides) and he was excluded on the grounds of public safety, it didn't help his case that when he'd been over here before other groups had complained of his incitement to violence. He has strong views on British laws which as most people will agree are probably best kept to yourself when you are a visitor in a country. I remember the outcry over a British person giving his opinion on the USA gun control debate while he was in the US. 

Special forces martial arts skills don't have to be far superior to anyone elses, if it comes to face to face fighting their first plan has probably gone..... small blue,black and white birds..... up.

Really? the names of a small bird is censored on here? good grief.


----------



## Chris Parker

K-man said:


> Not often I disagree with Chris but ...
> 
> in this case there are a number of reasons why I wouldn't be targeting the ribs and I would like to read Brian's thoughts on thus one. For me the ribs are low percentage for a couple of reasons. One, the opponent may have bulky clothing on and in some situations even a heavy vest. Two, as he leans forward to grab the weapon with his right hand the left arm is in the way of the kick. You might break the arm and still not stop him reaching the gun. Three, once he has the gun he will roll away from you to bring the weapon to bear. If you are a fraction late with the kick it's all over. "Chick, chick, bang!"
> 
> So let's look to the kick to the neck. We are kicking with the left leg. A right leg kick may well be deflected but the left leg is kicking into the body mass. You might not get the neck but you will at least get the side of the head. For me that is high percentage.
> 
> And finally, number four in the reasons why I would rely on the kicks to the ribs. In this situation both persons are fighting for their life. Under adrenalin the guy going for the gun won't even feel the kick to the ribs even if it breaks them. I've broken bones in tournaments, including ribs, and not even known about it until later. A kick to the neck, jaw or side of head is likely to finish the confrontation on the spot. At very worst it with stop the movement towards the weapon.
> :asian:



To be absolutely clear, I wouldn't necessarily advocate a kick to the ribs/body either&#8230; although I would pick it over an attempted kick to the throat. Honestly, I have trouble even trying to figure out what my approach would be&#8230; as I find the set-up in the clip to be thoroughly artificial and lacking in reality&#8230; as a result, I don't really have much reason to continue arguing the benefits/issues in this, my friend&#8230; suffice to say we both have different tactical expressions and values here, which is probably to be expected considering our different backgrounds&#8230; all cool there.


----------



## RTKDCMB

PhotonGuy said:


> In a situation like this I would kick the gun or stomp on his hand if he managed to get ahold of it before I was able to kick it. I would not kick to the guy's neck or head as depicted in the video as there is the possibility he could still manage to get the gun and use it in that case.



If you kick the gun you would have to be careful not to miss such a small target and to be weary that you don't kick the gun into the hands of an accomplice.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zero said:


> So what other technique would you employ PG if you have reservations with his move?



One option from that position is to go for a downward knife hand strike to the back of the neck. That way you are moving towards the gun at the same time and from the striking position you can use your other hand to grab or block his gun hand and prevent him from pointing the gun at you should he manage to grab it and turn over. The issue of kicking to the ribs is that you may just kick him into a position closer to the gun and he may still have the capacity pick it up and shoot you with it


----------



## PhotonGuy

Zero said:


> First I dont know much about this Larkin guy or his true abilities other than he apparently trained as a navy seal (and was prevented from entry into the UK over his training material or some such thing), which doesnt make him a great fighter or SD expert in itself from my own limited experience (I have fought in the ring against military and have trained with SAS and mainstream military and they are no better than any other well trained martial artists or self defence experts, in fact I have found the cops I have trained with and fought against somewhat better fighters in the scheme of things, sorry army guys!!! (and not counting my older army cousin who used to whoop on me)).  But this experience should hopefully mean he has trained in some key show-stopper techniques that have maximum effect with the minimum of expenditure and time.  If he has really spent the previous twenty years focusing on SD on top of that then he should have some good stuff to show.


I've heard that in the Army in basic training they teach you unarmed fighting techniques and they teach you quick ways to kill with your bare hands. Im not sure if this is true but I heard that upon completing basic, or after you've been in the Army long enough and have learned enough, that you're about as good as the average black belt in a fight.


----------



## oftheherd1

PhotonGuy said:


> I've heard that in the Army in basic training they teach you unarmed fighting techniques and they teach you quick ways to kill with your bare hands. Im not sure if this is true but I heard that upon completing basic, or after you've been in the Army long enough and have learned enough, that you're about as good as the average black belt in a fight.



Think about that.  Every cook, paper-pusher, medic, finance clerk, radio operator, etc, will be a trained killer after they have "... been in the Army long enough and have learned enough ..."?  After you get past those job specialties that don't normally expect to be anywhere close to combat, how long is long enough?  Normal enlistments are three years.  All those other job specialties are needed and I am not trying to put them down, as any of them could (and have in the past)  find themselves in combat roles, but you should see through such a statement as that.  Also, most training will be with a primary weapon which would not be hands; rifles, artillery pieces, tank guns, etc, will get the most training.  Those in jobs that don't normally involve combat operations will normally train for and work in that job all day, just as combat arms will normally train for combat operations.


----------



## tshadowchaser

PhotonGuy said:


> I've heard that in the Army in basic training they teach you unarmed fighting techniques and they teach you quick ways to kill with your bare hands. Im not sure if this is true but I heard that upon completing basic, or after you've been in the Army long enough and have learned enough, that you're about as good as the average black belt in a fight.



Nope the hand to hand you get in basic is just that basic and not much of that either


----------



## ballen0351

I'd just pull my own gun and end it.  Never use a kick where a gun will do.  But honestly can't even think of a possible way other then made for TV make believe that you would end up in a situation like that.


----------



## Blindside

PhotonGuy said:


> I've heard that in the Army in basic training they teach you unarmed fighting techniques and they teach you quick ways to kill with your bare hands. Im not sure if this is true but I heard that upon completing basic, or after you've been in the Army long enough and have learned enough, that you're about as good as the average black belt in a fight.



Unless the individual soldier or marine seeks out specific training in unarmed combatives or other martial arts they will not be well trained.  I have had the opportunity to assist with the instruction of one of the SF groups (my instructor was the contract instructor for them), and they were for the most part just as inexperienced as most of the civilians I have trained.  Far better "combat mentality" that most civilians, heck, better than me, most of them had seen combat, but their unarmed or knife/stick/machete skillsets (on average) weren't anything to speak of.


----------



## ballen0351

Blindside said:


> Unless the individual soldier or marine seeks out specific training in unarmed combatives or other martial arts they will not be well trained.  I have had the opportunity to assist with the instruction of one of the SF groups (my instructor was the contract instructor for them), and they were for the most part just as inexperienced as most of the civilians I have trained.  Far better "combat mentality" that most civilians, heck, better than me, most of them had seen combat, but their unarmed or knife/stick/machete skillsets (on average) weren't anything to speak of.



It's just not there wheel house.  Hand to hand combat in today's battle fields is kinda rare.  We don't form the line and charge anymore. The military spends it's time training on more common occurrences.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> One option from that position is to go for a downward knife hand strike to the back of the neck.



Isn't that like a Judo chop from those old movies? :lol:


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

Hanzou said:


> Isn't that like a Judo chop from those old movies? :lol:



Don't underestimate the power of the judo chop.

It works against multiple opponents and is very intimidating to potential attackers, as proven in this incident:


----------



## Dirty Dog

You are confused. That was not a judo chop.
It was the much more devastating judy chop. Second only to the Dim Mak Death Touch in shear lethality.


----------



## Chris Parker

PhotonGuy said:


> I've heard that in the Army in basic training they teach you unarmed fighting techniques and they teach you quick ways to kill with your bare hands. Im not sure if this is true but I heard that upon completing basic, or after you've been in the Army long enough and have learned enough, that you're about as good as the average black belt in a fight.



Oh dear lord&#8230; no. No on many levels.

Firstly, in order to be lethal, they have weapons. In fact, most martial arts (historically) are exactly the same&#8230; if you intend to kill, you use a weapon. Unarmed isn't about killing, and hasn't ever been. Next, basic training is exactly that, basic&#8230; in fact, only a small amount is dedicated to actual combative training&#8230; and in some armies, there is no time given for unarmed methods at all. It's just not seen as a priority, which makes it a waste of time (when everything is taken into account). 

So no, to pretty much every word there. I don't know where you hear all these things, but you need to listen to better sources.


----------



## PhotonGuy

I know former marines and according to them you are taught unarmed fighting. You don't spend as much time and its not as big a priority as training with weapons, for obvious reasons, but you are taught how to fight without weapons. The reason being is for confidence. A marine on the front line will obviously be using a rifle or some other weapon that's equally or more effective but the reason they're taught to fight unarmed is because they're some situations where it can be used but mostly to give the soldier self confidence.


----------



## Dirty Dog

PhotonGuy said:


> I know former marines and according to them you are taught unarmed fighting. You don't spend as much time and its not as big a priority as training with weapons, for obvious reasons, but you are taught how to fight without weapons. The reason being is for confidence. A marine on the front line will obviously be using a rifle or some other weapon that's equally or more effective but the reason they're taught to fight unarmed is because they're some situations where it can be used but mostly to give the soldier self confidence.



Right. The Marine Corps combat program awards their Black Belt after 150 hours of training. So, less hours than most of us work in a month.

Yup. That's some deadly stuff right there....


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Isn't that like a Judo chop from those old movies? :lol:



known as a rabbit chop from there. It used to be a cool street fighting move.

i have never tried it.

as far as the kick goes.

yeah why not? I mean you are sort of heading that way anyway because you want to be near that gun so a shot on the way in even if it isn't an ideal range would be viable.

i would still be trying for that weapon as well. If you could sneak across and grab a head arm you should be able to control him pretty well while you try to secure the gun.


----------



## Zero

PhotonGuy said:


> I know former marines and according to them you are taught unarmed fighting. You don't spend as much time and its not as big a priority as training with weapons, for obvious reasons, but you are taught how to fight without weapons. The reason being is for confidence. A marine on the front line will obviously be using a rifle or some other weapon that's equally or more effective but the reason they're taught to fight unarmed is because they're some situations where it can be used but mostly to give the soldier self confidence.



Wow, that must be it. I can see how a paltry amount of H2H training could really install confidence in a soldier when having to face something like, oh, I don't know, a tank or numerous hostiles firing on you...clearly being a crack-shot sniper just won't give you that same level of confidence...


----------



## Tez3

Zero said:


> Wow, that must be it. I can see how a paltry amount of H2H training could really install confidence in a soldier when having to face something like, oh, I don't know, a tank or numerous hostiles firing on you...clearly being a crack-shot sniper just won't give you that same level of confidence...



LOL! I'd imagine the training was pretty pointless too in giving self confidence. We could save a lot of money training troops couldn't we, just give them a bit of H2H and Bobs your uncle.


----------



## Zero

Tez3 said:


> LOL! I'd imagine the training was pretty pointless too in giving self confidence. We could save a lot of money training troops couldn't we, just give them a bit of H2H and Bobs your uncle.


Careful, if government get wind of this, may justify even more MoD cuts:
"You mean, we don't actually need to fork out on effective 21C assault and protective kit for the troops?"
"That's right, we can just train them in H2H, it doesn't cost a penny and we have a unit of "ultra-confident" killing machines!"


----------



## Cirdan

PhotonGuy said:


> I know former marines and according to them you are taught unarmed fighting. You don't spend as much time and its not as big a priority as training with weapons, for obvious reasons, but you are taught how to fight without weapons. The reason being is for confidence. A marine on the front line will obviously be using a rifle or some other weapon that's equally or more effective but the reason they're taught to fight unarmed is because they're some situations where it can be used but mostly to give the soldier self confidence.



Why would unarmed training give more confidence than knowing you can handle your primary weapons well? Back in the army I would take my boys to the shooting range any time I had the chanse, close quater combat training was far from the top of the list as long as a bare minimum was satisfied.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Wow, that must be it. I can see how a paltry amount of H2H training could really install confidence in a soldier when having to face something like, oh, I don't know, a tank or numerous hostiles firing on you...clearly being a crack-shot sniper just won't give you that same level of confidence...



that is why we still do bayonets.


----------



## Cirdan

drop bear said:


> that is why we still do bayonets.



Bayonets are for when bullets run out.


----------



## Zero

Cirdan said:


> Bayonets are for when bullets run out.


Do you have to wait until they are in close quarter distance to use those bayonets or can those things be thrown?  : )


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> that is why we still do bayonets.


Is that still done is it?  I kind of can't picture modern infantry stabbing away at sand bags to build confidence but may be completely wrong there...does anyone with current military experience, Tez3 maybe, know if this is still practiced to any degree? 
Appreciate the extra distance gained but I wonder if it came to that if you would be better depending on and employing decent knife skills?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Zero said:


> Do you have to wait until they are in close quarter distance to use those bayonets or can those things be thrown?  : )



Do you know what happens if you throw your knife in a fight?

You lose your knife...


----------



## Zero

Dirty Dog said:


> Do you know what happens if you throw your knife in a fight?
> 
> You lose your knife...



When I throw a knife it goes something like this:

I lose my knife,
You lose your life

See, I told you I was into all that soft, soppy  poetry writing too


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Is that still done is it?  I kind of can't picture modern infantry stabbing away at sand bags to build confidence but may be completely wrong there...does anyone with current military experience, Tez3 maybe, know if this is still practiced to any degree?
> Appreciate the extra distance gained but I wonder if it came to that if you would be better depending on and employing decent knife skills?


Australia does it. England did a bayonet charge in Afghanistan.


----------



## Zero

I was going to put something in there about "wife" also but then thought better about getting another thread locked   (still not sure about these smileys)


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> Australia does it. England did a bayonet charge in Afghanistan.


Three hundred years ago or recent?  Why would you do that, had the whole troop run out of ammo?


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> Australia does it. England did a bayonet charge in Afghanistan.


Soldier who led Afghanistan bayonet charge into hail of bullets honoured - Telegraph


----------



## Transk53

Zero said:


> Three hundred years ago or recent?  Why would you do that, had the whole troop run out of ammo?



Are you thinking the Crimean war and the "Charge of the Light Brigade"?


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> Soldier who led Afghanistan bayonet charge into hail of bullets honoured - Telegraph


Great read, thanks.


----------



## Tez3

It should be noted that the *British* soldier who  lead the bayonet charge was from the Princess of Wales' *Royal* Regiment not as stated in the article.
Yes using the bayonet is still part of the British military training and the iconic bayonet charge to attack the sandbags is still done by recruits. And great fun it is too watching them. 
Also awarded for bravery BBC News - Gurkha who repelled Taliban attack gets bravery medal


----------



## Tez3

Here you go, this is from a documentary made at the Infantry Training Centre at Catterick, where I am. The Gurkha recruits also do their training here, they come straight from selection in Nepal to cold, wet and windy North Yorkshire.


----------



## Cirdan

Zero said:


> Do you have to wait until they are in close quarter distance to use those bayonets or can those things be thrown?  : )



If you think they are needed you would go "BAYONETS ON!" before storming a position.

As for throwing I`d rather hurl a rock.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Cirdan said:


> If you think they are needed you would go "BAYONETS ON!" before storming a position.
> 
> As for throwing I`d rather hurl a rock.



Yes. Throw a rock and keep your knife. Or better yet... throw a grenade.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> that is why we still do bayonets.


Bayonets don't work too well on tanks.


----------



## Cirdan

RTKDCMB said:


> Bayonets don't work too well on tanks.



Yeah, you need a katana for that right?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Cirdan said:


> Yeah, you need a katana for that right?


Or a grappler.


----------



## Cirdan

RTKDCMB said:


> Or a grappler.



Of course, "charge and armbar those 120mm cannons boys, forward!"


----------



## Zero

Cirdan said:


> If you think they are needed you would go "BAYONETS ON!" before storming a position.
> 
> As for throwing I`d rather hurl a rock.


Jebus, just to be clear, I was kidding on that one!!


----------



## Cirdan

Zero said:


> Jebus, just to be clear, I was kidding on that one!!



Sergeant Zim says you don`t frakking kid around with bayonets. MEDIC!


----------



## Tez3

RTKDCMB said:


> Bayonets don't work too well on tanks.



Well funny you should say that but my OH who drove Scorpion tracked vehicles in the RAF Regiment says that a well placed bayonet in the tracks would stop it quite nicely.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zero said:


> Jebus, just to be clear, I was kidding on that one!!


Forgot to add the smiley face didn't you?


----------



## Tez3

Off topic sorry but I might not get back on again to post on proper place ( mods please move/delete when sorted?) I'm having massive difficulties getting onto the MT, when I do I can't click on 'new posts', can't click on messages or alerts latter goes haywire whizzing around if I do. Having probs using smileys too. Whole site is taking ages to load. This is on my tablet as well not just computer, neither are connected to each other.
If someone please could direct this to appropriate person I'd be grateful. Thank you!


----------



## oftheherd1

Zero said:


> Three hundred years ago or recent?  Why would you do that, had the whole troop run out of ammo?



I am guessing you have never been in the military? 

First, there is something about a bayonet on a rifle that instills more fear that just a charge while firing your rifle.  I guess it implies a more dangerous intimacy or something.  That may have been one thing that helped the British soldiers mentioned by Tez3, as well as their displayed audacity.

Second, bayonets are not just for offense, but defense as well.  In a conflict like the recent ones we have had in Iraq and Afghanistan, massed attacks have not been the norm.  But they are still possible.  Even if not a mass attack, you may still be attacked by a superior force that attempts to keep you penned down until they get to your position.  As the defender, you might want your bayonet fixed to your rifle; you may be able to thrust with it to greater advantage that shooting, or be unable to shoot.


----------



## Zero

oftheherd1 said:


> I am guessing you have never been in the military?
> 
> First, there is something about a bayonet on a rifle that instills more fear that just a charge while firing your rifle.  I guess it implies a more dangerous intimacy or something.  That may have been one thing that helped the British soldiers mentioned by Tez3, as well as their displayed audacity.
> 
> Second, bayonets are not just for offense, but defense as well.  In a conflict like the recent ones we have had in Iraq and Afghanistan, massed attacks have not been the norm.  But they are still possible.  Even if not a mass attack, you may still be attacked by a superior force that attempts to keep you penned down until they get to your position.  As the defender, you might want your bayonet fixed to your rifle; you may be able to thrust with it to greater advantage that shooting, or be unable to shoot.



I had thought by my posts and questions that was patently clear!  : )    I defer to someone like you with military experience, no qualms about that at all!  : )


----------



## Zero

RTKDCMB said:


> Forgot to add the smiley face didn't you?


That would be a yes, I had vainly hoped what I had meant as wit would come across as such and without the need for online smiley clarifications, I was so wrong!.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zero said:


> That would be a yes, I had vainly hoped what I had meant as wit would come across as such and without the need for online smiley clarifications, I was so wrong!.


We all have to be weary of Poe's law.


----------



## drop bear

I have always secured the weapon first and then hit the guy. Which here would mean knees rather than kicks.

but my last one with the scissors the guy got kicked in the head as part of the disarming process. Not by me though.

i have never seen a guy collapse backwards like that from a ground kick and doubt that would be the result.

worse case he will eat the kick grab your leg and you will have to fight to stay standing.

you could prevent that by grabbing his head pushing it down and throwing knees.

so it is going to be a toss up as to what you are willing to risk.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> Off topic sorry but I might not get back on again to post on proper place ( mods please move/delete when sorted?) I'm having massive difficulties getting onto the MT, when I do I can't click on 'new posts', can't click on messages or alerts latter goes haywire whizzing around if I do. Having probs using smileys too. Whole site is taking ages to load. This is on my tablet as well not just computer, neither are connected to each other.
> If someone please could direct this to appropriate person I'd be grateful. Thank you!



At some point there will be an update or patch. It could be though that you need some Windows updates.


----------



## PhotonGuy

Obviously most of a soldier's combat training would be with weapons since that's what they fight with, but they do get some basic hand to hand training.


----------



## Tez3

PhotonGuy said:


> Obviously most of a soldier's combat training would be with weapons since that's what they fight with, but they do get some basic hand to hand training.



Well no, not really. They are far too busy, they have a lot to get in their basic training, being a soldier is far more technical than many realise. It's far more than just using weapons. here's a blog. ITC Catterick The Official British Army Blog


PS took me 3/4 hour to get on here, still have no inbox or 'alerts'. Every other site I use is fine, it's only this one!


----------



## Tez3

A quick shufti through infantry training here. Those who are fans of Bernard Cornwall's Sharpe novels may recognise the cap badge. It's the Rifles (The Light Infantry) who wear green No1s (dress uniforms) and march faster than the rest of the British army (apart from the Gurkhas)
itc catterick - Bing Videos


----------



## Tony Dismukes

s





PhotonGuy said:


> Obviously most of a soldier's combat training would be with weapons since that's what they fight with, but they do get some basic hand to hand training.





Tez3 said:


> Well no, not really. They are far too busy, they have a lot to get in their basic training, being a soldier is far more technical than many realise. It's far more than just using weapons. here's a blog. ITC Catterick The Official British Army Blog



I don't know about the British military, but the U.S. Army has the Modern Army Combaitves program and the Marine Corp has the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program.


----------



## Tez3

The military here has a comprehensive sports programme including martial arts, we have several military personnel who fight in MMA including Martin Stapleton (TUF and UFC) who was a Royal Marine Commando until he came out recently. His MMA suffered with his deployments in Afghanistan. We have Olympic Judokas in the military as well.


----------



## pgsmith

Tony Dismukes said:


> s
> 
> 
> I don't know about the British military, but the U.S. Army has the Modern Army Combaitves program and the Marine Corp has the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program.



  Unless it has changed recently, it's the Rangers that have Modern Army Combatives program, not the Army as a whole.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

pgsmith said:


> Unless it has changed recently, it's the Rangers that have Modern Army Combatives program, not the Army as a whole.



According to the Wikipedia article: "_In August 2007, MAC training became required in every Army unit by Army regulation 350-1."
_
It's almost 30 years since I was in the military, so I don't have any first hand experience, but I've talked to friends in the Army who were not Rangers but had MAC training.


----------



## PhotonGuy

I once knew this guy who claimed to have some kind of government job. He might've been FBI although Im not sure. Anyway, according to him on some of his assignments he went to the Pentagon and that he saw Navy SEALS training in hand to hand combat where they would be sparring and kicking each other full contact wearing combat boots. Supposedly there's certain levels on the Pentagon where they do that. He apparently also saw somebody get slammed into the concrete with a judo type throw and they had to call in the medic and at first he thought he had died. 

Anyway, no doubt this guy was full of it, I don't particularly believe his stories but I do know from some first hand sources that SEALS do get good H2H training.


----------



## jks9199

Yes, SEALs, Green Berets, and lots of other units get some hand to hand training.  They do need to be prepared if disarmed, or if they're in a situation where they don't want to kill someone -- especially as the world of modern war fighting has evolved to include a lot more stuff that is closer to policing than all out warfare, with insurgent forces hiding among civilians.  That doesn't change the simple fact that the primary approach of military fighting is ARMED.

As to full force training... probably not that much.  It'd kind of suck to take your teammate out right before an op because you were practicing fisticuffs, y'know?


----------



## PhotonGuy

jks9199 said:


> Yes, SEALs, Green Berets, and lots of other units get some hand to hand training.  They do need to be prepared if disarmed, or if they're in a situation where they don't want to kill someone -- especially as the world of modern war fighting has evolved to include a lot more stuff that is closer to policing than all out warfare, with insurgent forces hiding among civilians.  That doesn't change the simple fact that the primary approach of military fighting is ARMED.
> 
> As to full force training... probably not that much.  It'd kind of suck to take your teammate out right before an op because you were practicing fisticuffs, y'know?



Well yes I did once talk with a former Army Ranger and he said that they did some sparring in the sand pits but that the instructors made sure they didn't get too hard because they didn't want any of them to be unnecessarily injured where they couldn't function on a team because of all the money spent to train them. Training Rangers, SEALS, Green Berets, any of those elite soldiers is expensive and the government doesn't want to lose its investment by having somebody get injured and not able to do their job that they've been trained to do at great financial cost.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> s
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know about the British military, but the U.S. Army has the Modern Army Combaitves program and the Marine Corp has the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program.



i was on a forum with an American military guy who seemed legit. And asked him the question. How many fist fights in Afghanistan?

he said a lot. A couple of thousand.

if true hand to hand is pretty prevalent.


----------



## Blindside

PhotonGuy said:


> Well yes I did once talk with a former Army Ranger and he said that they did some sparring in the sand pits but that the instructors made sure they didn't get too hard because they didn't want any of them to be unnecessarily injured where they couldn't function on a team because of all the money spent to train them. Training Rangers, SEALS, Green Berets, any of those elite soldiers is expensive and the government doesn't want to lose its investment by having somebody get injured and not able to do their job that they've been trained to do at great financial cost.



I know of one instructor who lost his contract with a SF unit because of unnecessary injuries in the training sessions.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> i was on a forum with an American military guy who seemed legit. And asked him the question. How many fist fights in Afghanistan?
> 
> he said a lot. *A couple of thousand.*
> 
> if true hand to hand is pretty prevalent.



Really? Who with, the insurgents? military v military? The later would make it just scraps btw not hand to hand. The insurgents in Afghan do not 'do' hand to hand, their style is hidden ieds, blowing up schools and ambushing soldiers, also sniping and suicide bombs. They rarely do 'charges'


----------



## Danny T

For the past 12 years I have been instructing 2-3 training sessions  per year with the 256th Infantry Brigade Combat Team. As far as I've been told all of them have been through the MAC program (Modern Army Combatives). There are several reasons for the course and for the most part is excellent training with in the limitation of the training. 

*To educate soldiers on how to protect themselves against threats without using their firearms*
*To provide a non-lethal response to situations on the battlefield*
*To instill the 'warrior instinct and ethos' *
*To provide the necessary aggression to meet the enemy unflinchingly*
The training begins with learning to maintain control of your weapon in a fight. Trainees are then taught how to gain control of a potential enemy at the longest possible range in order to maintain tactical flexibility, what the different tactical options are and how to use them.
The three basic options upon encountering a resistant opponent taught are:
-One: disengage to regain projectile weapon range
-Two: gain a controlling position and utilize a secondary weapon
-Three: close the distance and gain control to finish the fight.

The basic techniques form a framework upon which the rest of the program is built and are taught through a series of drills. The course is heavy on groundfighting from bjj, sambo, and wrestling, it is supposed to not lose sight of the fact that it is designed for soldiers going into combat. It is made clear that while combatives can be used to kill or disable,* the soldier that typically wins a hand-to-hand fight in combat is the one whose allies arrive with guns first.*

Subsequent training builds upon the basic framework by adding throws and takedowns from wrestling & judo, striking from boxing & muay thai, bladed and blunt object weapons fighting combined with how to conduct scenario training and used in the various levels of Combatives competitions.

The largest problem I have with this training is the lack of realism in the training and is what I work with the 256th in. The MAC program at its highest level is MMA not COMBAT!!! 
Groundfighting is great until one has is in full combat gear. Try doing a throw or a double leg with a 60 lb ruck on your back. It Isn't Going To Happen! Try doing a bridge, trap, & roll mount escape with the ruck. Soldiers are not going to put down their rifle or sidearm to mount and pulloff a spinning armbar. 
First thing I do when instructing is require all participants to have all the gear they will be normally carrying in a combat situation. A large amount the MAC program training is immediately negated but for the combat mindset.


----------



## Tez3

One of the joys of the British army is that learning to fight is probably the thing you don't need to teach them lol. They are naturally pugnacious and have learnt long before they joined up how to fight with fists, feet, knees etc. The combat mind set is one they are more than familiar with. fighting is their favourite sport next to drinking and shagging (sometimes though fighting is better than either of these) The main thing is to channel that into aiming them at things that needs to be fought. This, hopefully, is the enemy.
British squaddies are a unique blend of  warrior, street thug and the kindest, most moral ( their own though) nicest people you can imagine having on your side. If they aren't on your side though, best run 
The Royal Marines run their own hand to hand stuff, they like the sneaking around using cheese wire to slit throats sort of stuff, they are very good at it especially the SBS. The SAS do their own hand to hand stuff as well, they like writing books too but you shouldn't believe everything you read. And we have rugby.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Really? Who with, the insurgents? military v military? The later would make it just scraps btw not hand to hand. The insurgents in Afghan do not 'do' hand to hand, their style is hidden ieds, blowing up schools and ambushing soldiers, also sniping and suicide bombs. They rarely do 'charges'



insurgents i think or at least performing their role as soldiers. I don't believe he meant off duty pub brawls.

i have heard of hand to hand occurring during building raids. Iraq has a famous one during faluja.

and the Australian commandos have at least 1 documented one in Afghanistan. I have linked that one before. With Paul cale.


so it defiantly does happen.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> insurgents i think or at least performing their role as soldiers. I don't believe he meant off duty pub brawls.
> 
> i have heard of hand to hand occurring during building raids. Iraq has a famous one during faluja.
> 
> and the Australian commandos have at least 1 documented one in Afghanistan. I have linked that one before. With Paul cale.
> 
> 
> so it defiantly does happen.




It happens, but not 'thousands' of times. If it happens with commandos and SF then it's because it's being done on an operation by them not as a matter of course with the troops.
The policy of the insurgents is not to engage in CQF, they lay down IEDS because they know they injure our troops not kill them, this is deliberate, they want injured soldiers because they know then that our countries will have to continue paying and looking after them for years, they know that the sight of injured soldiers will continue to hurt us for years to come. When the limbs of our soldiers are blown off by these IEDs the Taliban collect them and hang them in the trees to taunt our troops.
They will mortar a school killing the children because they know our troops will come to help _even knowing it is a trap. T_here are occasions where the insurgents will attack directly of course but this is rarer than some will make out. I've heard boasting about fighting hand to hand before but it's usually just that, boasting.


----------



## jks9199

drop bear said:


> insurgents i think or at least performing their role as soldiers. I don't believe he meant off duty pub brawls.
> 
> i have heard of hand to hand occurring during building raids. Iraq has a famous one during faluja.
> 
> and the Australian commandos have at least 1 documented one in Afghanistan. I have linked that one before. With Paul cale.
> 
> 
> so it defiantly does happen.


Going hands on during building/room clearing is quite a bit different than "fighting with hand to hand."  I'm not personally aware of any sort of extensive or pervasive fights _a la_ a Chuck Norris or the fight scenes in *The Expendables* (any of them).


----------



## Fog565

Number one...I would never kick someone that is on the ground in that position. I also teach my students that. Will kicking somebody in the throat work?? That's a show stopper! Tony D is right about the legal issues. A kick to the throat could cause major injury or death that could land you in the clink. BUT....if there is a gun involved and they are reaching for it, do what you have to in order to stay alive or keep a by stander from getting shot. You were in fear for your life and they had a deadly weapon. Deadly force is legal in that aspect. Any law enforcement people please correct me if I'm wrong. Rich


----------



## Hanzou

The scenario in the video is hilarious. Basically the guy is just looking for an excuse to beat the crap out of a guy while he's down on all fours.


----------



## Fog565

I agree, Hanzou! The video suggests nothing other than kick somebody in the throat while they are down. Not a good example video IMO.


----------



## ballen0351

Fog565 said:


> I agree, Hanzou! The video suggests nothing other than kick somebody in the throat while they are down. Not a good example video IMO.


Yeah forget about the gun thing and all


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Yeah forget about the gun thing and all



Doesn't that scenario begin with the idea that you've already knocked the armed assailant on the ground and he dropped his gun in the process? If you did that to him standing up, does he really pose that much of a threat to you while on all fours and unarmed?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Doesn't that scenario begin with the idea that you've already knocked the armed assailant on the ground and he dropped his gun in the process? If you did that to him standing up, does he really pose that much of a threat to you while on all fours and unarmed?


Hes going for the gun thats laying right there.  So yes hes still a threat.  Thats the whole point


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Hes going for the gun thats laying right there.  So yes hes still a threat.  Thats the whole point



Okay.


----------



## Transk53

Hanzou said:


> Okay.



You a bit skeptical here?


----------



## Hanzou

Transk53 said:


> You a bit skeptical here?



Just a bit.

I don't buy the notion that this is a defense against someone reaching for a gun. Why would you kick someone in the throat, watch them hilariously roll over onto their back, and continue to pummel them instead of just going for the gun after you kick them?


----------



## Transk53

That is a good point. Someone may well pick it up and turn your head into a canoe.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Doesn't that scenario begin with the idea that you've already knocked the armed assailant on the ground and he dropped his gun in the process? If you did that to him standing up, does he really pose that much of a threat to you while on all fours and unarmed?


No, the scenario starts with a guy on the ground and Larkin does some very nasty things to him. When the inappropriateness of the techniques is pointed out the gun is introduced with the express proviso that he is reaching for the gun. 

As I said earlier, I've seen a lot of Tim Larkin's work. I find it excellent material and, to me, this is spot on. Wrestle over the gun and you have a good chance of being shot.


----------



## drop bear

Transk53 said:


> That is a good point. Someone may well pick it up and turn your head into a canoe.



the point to take home here is the situation is not real. So in a hypothetical you can make anything happen.

lets take this a step further and suggest i was teaching torture as a self defence method.

i am basically grasping at straws if i come up with this idea that he could have a bomb and i have to find the location before he kills all the puppies.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> No, the scenario starts with a guy on the ground and Larkin does some very nasty things to him. When the inappropriateness of the techniques is pointed out the gun is introduced with the express proviso that he is reaching for the gun.
> 
> As I said earlier, I've seen a lot of Tim Larkin's work. I find it excellent material and, to me, this is spot on. Wrestle over the gun and you have a good chance of being shot.



I didn't say wrestle over the gun. I said kick the guy in the face, let him roll 10 feet away onto his back, and then you grab the gun. The chest stomp, and the neck crank are silly and unnecessary.


----------



## Transk53

drop bear said:


> i am basically grasping at straws if i come up with this idea that he could have a bomb and i have to find the location before he kills all the puppies.



Guess it would depend on what type of puppies you are talking about 



drop bear said:


> the point to take home here is the situation is not real. So in a hypothetical you can make anything happen.



Yeah that I agree with. Hypothetical though can become all too real when you least expect it. There must be something you have larked about with, only for it to manifest itself before your eyes and turn into a what the hell situation.


----------



## drop bear

Transk53 said:


> Guess it would depend on what type of puppies you are talking about
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that I agree with. Hypothetical though can become all too real when you least expect it. There must be something you have larked about with, only for it to manifest itself before your eyes and turn into a what the hell situation.



yes. But i am not earning a wage by teaching people to kick other people in the throat.

it does seem like an attempt at badassery that when called on is getting rationalised.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I didn't say wrestle over the gun. I said kick the guy in the face, let him roll 10 feet away onto his back, and then you grab the gun. The chest stomp, and the neck crank are silly and unnecessary.


Then what?  You kicked him you grabbed the gun but he's still coming toward you?  What do you do next?


----------



## Transk53

drop bear said:


> yes. But i am not earning a wage by teaching people to kick other people in the throat.
> 
> it does seem like an attempt at badassery that when called on is getting rationalised.



Yeah guess it is looking at that way. Violence don't tend to be rational unless calculated. Then again even then.


----------



## K-man

I think we should look at what yo actually wrote.


Hanzou said:


> The scenario in the video is hilarious. Basically the guy is just looking for an excuse to beat the crap out of a guy while he's down on all fours.


You have a warped sense of humour if you find this hilarious. Larkin gave an example of an over the top response and put it into context. Within the context of the grab for the gun there was no over the top response, just the kick to the neck.



Hanzou said:


> Doesn't that scenario begin with the idea that you've already knocked the armed assailant on the ground and he dropped his gun in the process? If you did that to him standing up, does he really pose that much of a threat to you while on all fours and unarmed?


No, the scenario didn't start that way. The gun was introduced half way through the video.



Hanzou said:


> I don't buy the notion that this is a defense against someone reaching for a gun. Why would you kick someone in the throat, watch them hilariously roll over onto their back, and continue to pummel them instead of just going for the gun after you kick them?


You must have watched a different video. There was nothing after the kick in the scenario with the gun.


Hanzou said:


> I didn't say wrestle over the gun. I said kick the guy in the face, let him roll 10 feet away onto his back, and then you grab the gun. The chest stomp, and the neck crank are silly and unnecessary.


The chest stomp and neck break were an illustration of over the top action that was later put into context. Was it unnecessary? Sure in this instance. Could there possibly be a situation where it is appropriate? Certainly.

But exactly where did you say anything about kicking him in the face, letting him roll ten feet and grabbing the gun? I've reread the thread three times and missed it each time.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Then what?  You kicked him you grabbed the gun but he's still coming toward you?  What do you do next?



it is still a hypothetical.

are you going to engage in a fantasy off?

fine. I have the gun. He comes at me i pull the trigger and a flag comes out with the word bang.

we both have a laugh and eat ice cream.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> it is still a hypothetical.
> 
> are you going to engage in a fantasy off?
> 
> fine. I have the gun. He comes at me i pull the trigger and a flag comes out with the word bang.
> 
> we both have a laugh and eat ice cream.


All scenario based training is hypothetical. What point are you making? Are you saying this type of training is flawed?


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> it is still a hypothetical.
> 
> are you going to engage in a fantasy off?
> 
> fine. I have the gun. He comes at me i pull the trigger and a flag comes out with the word bang.
> 
> we both have a laugh and eat ice cream.


Well maybe in your world as a mall security guard at a shopping center this type of thing wont happen but for some this is a reality.  Id like to hear how hes going to fight now with a gun in his hand.  Thats what you need to think about when you go for the gun.  Now one hand is holding a gun so your going to have to fight one handed or try to put the gun some place.  Thats something I teach police recruits.  You draw your weapon but now you dont have a deadly force situation or you cant shoot for other reasons now what do you do?  If its your gun you can holster it up if not then what?


----------



## Transk53

K-man said:


> All scenario based training is hypothetical. What point are you making? Are you saying this type of training is flawed?



Do you in the context of the thread? We have different scenario training based on actual 999 incidents that we as a security team have dealt with.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> But exactly where did you say anything about kicking him in the face, letting him roll ten feet and grabbing the gun? I've reread the thread three times and missed it each time.



Like I said, I don't buy the idea that this is actually defense against a downed opponent going for a gun. If it were, you wouldn't kick the guy in the throat, and then chase his rolling body down and continue to beat on him. You would kick him in the throat and go for the gun. 

If you really buy that this is a legitimate defense against a person reaching for the gun, then please explain the point of the chest stomp and the neck crank?

If that followup is something to do against an unarmed assailant, then that followup is still ridiculous, because the kick, stomp, and crank are pretty unreliable methods to disable someone. Maybe if you're as big as Tony they're not, but someone smaller? Good luck cranking a bigger guy's neck like that, even if they're laying on their back.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Then what?  You kicked him you grabbed the gun but he's still coming toward you?  What do you do next?



Aren't we going on the notion that the kick was some sort of super-kick that has made this guy completely incapacitated to the point where I can walk over to him and stomp him in the chest, and then proceed to neck crank him with no resistance whatsoever? Or are we back in the real world where that kick to the throat probably did little damage, and as you say he's now coming toward me as I aim the gun at him?

If its the former, I'll have enough time to point the gun at him and call the cops. If its the (far more likely) latter scenario, I'd probably shoot and worry about the legal ramifications later.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Aren't we going on the notion that the kick was some sort of super-kick that has made this guy completely incapacitated to the point where I can walk over to him and stomp him in the chest, and then proceed to neck crank him with no resistance whatsoever? Or are we back in the real world where that kick to the throat probably did little damage, and as you say he's now coming toward me as I aim the gun at him?
> 
> If its the former, I'll have enough time to point the gun at him and call the cops. If its the (far more likely) latter scenario, I'd probably shoot and worry about the legal ramifications later.


I think that's the point of the follow up attacks neck crank or chest stomp.  I don't see it as you mst follow the steps a then b then c.  More the point of kick the neck or face or ribs or whatever and then follow up with more attacks until you have stopped the threat.  I'm sure there are other ways besides this.  If you were in the situation what would your BJJ response  be?  There are many ways to skin a cat.  I'd just shoot the dude but I always have a gun on me.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> I think that's the point of the follow up attacks neck crank or chest stomp.  I don't see it as you mst follow the steps a then b then c.  More the point of kick the neck or face or ribs or whatever and then follow up with more attacks until you have stopped the threat.  I'm sure there are other ways besides this.  If you were in the situation what would your BJJ response  be?  There are many ways to skin a cat.  I'd just shoot the dude but I always have a gun on me.



If the guy is on all fours and unarmed, I'm going to choke him out. Only way to be sure. Ironically, the assailant laying on his back is more dangerous than him on all fours.

If he's reaching for a gun, I'd probably do what Tony did and kick him, (except with a soccer kick to the head or face, not a throat kick) as hard as I can, and then go for the gun. Like I said, if he's still coming at me at that point, I'm shooting him.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> All scenario based training is hypothetical. What point are you making? Are you saying this type of training is flawed?



this type of argument is flawed. All training is flawed.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Well maybe in your world as a mall security guard at a shopping center this type of thing wont happen but for some this is a reality.  Id like to hear how hes going to fight now with a gun in his hand.  Thats what you need to think about when you go for the gun.  Now one hand is holding a gun so your going to have to fight one handed or try to put the gun some place.  Thats something I teach police recruits.  You draw your weapon but now you dont have a deadly force situation or you cant shoot for other reasons now what do you do?  If its your gun you can holster it up if not then what?



any way he wants. Because he can make the rest of the scenario up.
because it is hypothetical.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> All scenario based training is hypothetical. What point are you making? Are you saying this type of training is flawed?



and of course this training specifically. Where we are kicking people in to back flips so you can jump on there chest is flawed.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> any way he wants. Because he can make the rest of the scenario up.
> because it is hypothetical.


So how would you handle it?


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> this type of argument is flawed. All training is flawed.


So why train at all?


----------



## Steve

ballen0351 said:


> So why train at all?


this scenario may be unrealistic, but that doesn't mean all are.   But the real point, I think, is that everyone should remember that training cannot make you a functional expert, tegardless of the quality of the training.   Nothing can replace experience.   All training can only get you so far.  


ballen0351 said:


> Then what?  You kicked him you grabbed the gun but he's still coming toward you?  What do you do next?


You'd shoot him?   If I had his gun, and genuinely feared for my life, I think i would, too.   


Transk53 said:


> Do you in the context of the thread? We have different scenario training based on actual 999 incidents


i thought you guys changed the number to something easier to remember:  0118 999 88199 9119  725 3.


----------



## Transk53

@Steve. My phone is a nightmare to qoute on. Don't forget we over do everything lol


----------



## K-man

Transk53 said:


> Do you in the context of the thread? We have different scenario training based on actual 999 incidents that we as a security team have dealt with.


I am just commenting on Tony Blaur's scenario. I think it is as likely as any other in the struggle for control of a weapon. By all means base scenario training on actual incidents but as every situation is different, the training is still hypothetical. I don't have any issue with that at all.


----------



## Transk53

K-man said:


> I am just commenting on Tony Blaur's scenario. I think it is as likely as any other in the struggle for control of a weapon. By all means base scenario training on actual incidents but as every situation is different, the training is still hypothetical. I don't have any issue with that at all.



Yeah see what you mean now  Oh at least our live fire evac the other day means we do not have train now until next year. Scenario training is a bit patchy, especially when you know it is. I much prefer the situation when it is unannounced. The former lack fluidity IMHO. More practical over theory kind of thing.


----------



## Steve

@Transk53  cool new feature...  You can tag users now.  Neat.


----------



## Transk53

Steve said:


> @Transk53  cool new feature...  You can tag users now.  Neat.



Crikey, I can just about tag a picture on Facebook  lol.


----------



## Transk53

Yeah I found that one out when I put confused.com lol


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Like I said, I don't buy the idea that this is actually defense against a downed opponent going for a gun. If it were, you wouldn't kick the guy in the throat, and then chase his rolling body down and continue to beat on him. You would kick him in the throat and go for the gun.
> 
> If you really buy that this is a legitimate defense against a person reaching for the gun, then please explain the point of the chest stomp and the neck crank?
> 
> If that followup is something to do against an unarmed assailant, then that followup is still ridiculous, because the kick, stomp, and crank are pretty unreliable methods to disable someone. Maybe if you're as big as Tony they're not, but someone smaller? Good luck cranking a bigger guy's neck like that, even if they're laying on their back.


So what you are saying is that you didn't actually say what you claimed you had said?

So go back and watch the video. Listen to what Tony says the point of the lesson is. You are missing that. The point is, as a lot of us teach, don't fixate on the weapon. Destroy the attacker. In real life it is not like you playing around in the ring. On the street your life may depend on such a situation as this. Make the wrong choice and you could be dead.

The point of the chest stomp was as *ballen* said, ensuring the attacker was no longer a risk. In a real situation would Tony have done that or picked up the gun? I would have thought that he would still have disabled the attacker as he doesn't know if the gun is loaded or that it isn't an imitation. Would he have done the neck crank? Who know? He is demonstrating that you always have a follow up available. 



Hanzou said:


> If the guy is on all fours and unarmed, I'm going to choke him out. Only way to be sure. Ironically, the assailant laying on his back is more dangerous than him on all fours.
> 
> If he's reaching for a gun, I'd probably do what Tony did and kick him, (except with a soccer kick to the head or face, not a throat kick) as hard as I can, and then go for the gun. Like I said, if he's still coming at me at that point, I'm shooting him.


What you really mean is that you will *attempt* to choke him out. Only way? You have no idea whether or not he is a more competent grappler than you but you are prepared to bet your life on it. Really? On the street that is an ego trip likely to get you killed.

Now I hate to disagree with you but what you are saying makes no sense to anyone with any training in this area. Why would you ever attempt a soccer kick to the face? All he has to do is lift his shoulder and your kick is going to slide past. Even if he just turns his head your kick may well slide off. Tony is kicking into the 'V' of his shoulder and neck, much less chance of missing.


----------



## Transk53

K-man said:


> So what you are saying is that you didn't actually say what you claimed you had said?
> 
> So go back and watch the video. Listen to what Tony says the point of the lesson is. You are missing that. The point is, as a lot of us teach, don't fixate on the weapon. Destroy the attacker. In real life it is not like you playing around in the ring. On the street your life may depend on such a situation as this. Make the wrong choice and you could be dead.
> 
> The point of the chest stomp was as *ballen* said, ensuring the attacker was no longer a risk. In a real situation would Tony have done that or picked up the gun? I would have thought that he would still have disabled the attacker as he doesn't know if the gun is loaded or that it isn't an imitation. Would he have done the neck crank? Who know? He is demonstrating that you always have a follow up available.
> 
> What you really mean is that you will *attempt* to choke him out. Only way? You have no idea whether or not he is a more competent grappler than you but you are prepared to bet your life on it. Really. On the street that is an ego trip likely to get you killed.
> 
> Now I hate to disagree with you but what you are saying makes no sense to anyone with any training in this area. Why would you ever attempt a soccer kick to the face? All he has to do is lift his shoulder and your kick is going to slide past. Even if he just turns his head your kick may well slide off. Tony is kicking into the 'V' of his shoulder and neck, much less chance of missing.



Must be why I did not get it. Could not view the vid, had to guess.


----------



## Steve

Ballen shared a story recently where he was facing a lot of potential attackers.   I recall him mention specifically addressing the gun.   Iirc, he made a point of kicking it under a car so that it was not a threat to him.  

Now you're saying he agrees with you that you destroy the attacker and don't fixate on the weapon.   Some attention to both seems more appropropriate, and im guessing that most people would agree.  Maybe not.


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> Ballen shared a story recently where he was facing a lot of potential attackers.   I recall him mention specifically addressing the gun.   Iirc, he made a point of kicking it under a car so that it was not a threat to him.
> 
> Now you're saying he agrees with you that you destroy the attacker and don't fixate on the weapon.   Some attention to both seems more appropropriate, and im guessing that most people would agree.  Maybe not.


It totally would depend on the situation.  Had it been one or two attackers I'd have picked up the gun and secured it.  I'm comfortable enough to keep two guys away from me long enough to tuck the gun in my belt or something.  With the crowd that large all I had time to do was move the gun and even then it wasn't the smartest move.  Also had there not been a car there I'd have to of come up with a new plan quickly.  One on one I'd always address the man first because a gun can't hurt me laying on the ground by itself.


----------



## Steve

Sounds reasonable, ballen.   Either way, you're accounting for the weapon.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> Sounds reasonable, ballen.   Either way, you're accounting for the weapon.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


So is the original video.  If not for the weapon kicking a guy on the ground like that would be criminal in my opinion


----------



## Steve

I think the video acknowledges the weapon, but kman suggested that the lesson is to destroy the attacker and not fixate on the weapon.   He brought your name into it.    

My position is that you really have to keep both in mind.   Focusing on destroying the attacker could lead to losing track of the weapon.   Vice versa is also true.  




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tshadowchaser

personally unless I had many witnesses that I knew with out any doubt would back me up in court I would not want any of my prints on the gun. And if no one there was going to help me out at the moment I would not be counting on their  testimony in a court.
AS for choking the guy on the ground out why take the chance that he knows  or dose not know more than you. Heck kick the crap out of him or as has been said try to kick the gun away but mostly get out of harms way as fast as possible. As for that neck kick, well, the body is an easier target, even stomping the hand or arm
Why put your body down to a body to body level unless you  one of the best in the world or special opps trained


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> I think the video acknowledges the weapon, but kman suggested that the lesson is to destroy the attacker and not fixate on the weapon.   He brought your name into it.
> 
> My position is that you really have to keep both in mind.   Focusing on destroying the attacker could lead to losing track of the weapon.   Vice versa is also true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I agree you can't destroy the attacker absent the gun or you will find yourself in court trying to justify why you did what you did.  The gun totally changes your response in my opinion.  I can be much more violent in my attack because of the gun.  Remove it and we'll I'd scale back my attack greatly or face prision time


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> So what you are saying is that you didn't actually say what you claimed you had said?



Where did I say that?



> So go back and watch the video. Listen to what Tony says the point of the lesson is. You are missing that. The point is, as a lot of us teach, don't fixate on the weapon. Destroy the attacker. In real life it is not like you playing around in the ring. On the street your life may depend on such a situation as this. Make the wrong choice and you could be dead.



Attempting to follow up a throat kick with a chest stomp and a neck crank   is probably the wrong choice when a gun is laying around. Honestly, it could be the wrong choice when a gun isn't in play. All three of those attacks are pretty low percentage.



> The point of the chest stomp was as *ballen* said, ensuring the attacker was no longer a risk. In a real situation would Tony have done that or picked up the gun? I would have thought that he would still have disabled the attacker as he doesn't know if the gun is loaded or that it isn't an imitation. Would he have done the neck crank? Who know? He is demonstrating that you always have a follow up available.



Really? If the chest stop ensured that the attacker was out of commission, why did he do a neck crank afterwards?



> What you really mean is that you will *attempt* to choke him out. Only way? You have no idea whether or not he is a more competent grappler than you but you are prepared to bet your life on it. Really? On the street that is an ego trip likely to get you killed.



Assuming he is a better grappler, slapping a choke with him on all fours is far less risky than attempting a chest stomp or a standing neck crank with him on his back. If he's a better grappler, you don't want him on his back under any circumstances.



> Now I hate to disagree with you but what you are saying makes no sense to anyone with any training in this area. Why would you ever attempt a soccer kick to the face? All he has to do is lift his shoulder and your kick is going to slide past. Even if he just turns his head your kick may well slide off. Tony is kicking into the 'V' of his shoulder and neck, much less chance of missing.



So let me get this straight; You're arguing that with your opponent on all fours, the head is an easier target to miss than the neck?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> So how would you handle it?



i would just give him his gun back. Obviously the guy had just tripped over at the shooting range.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> So why train at all?



to be a bit less flawed. This is why you will hear the term low percentage/high percentage.

and not works/doesn't work.


----------



## Transk53

drop bear said:


> i would just give him his gun back. Obviously the guy had just tripped over at the shooting range.



Tripped over, lost his cool?


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> So what you are saying is that you didn't actually say what you claimed you had said?
> 
> So go back and watch the video. Listen to what Tony says the point of the lesson is. You are missing that. The point is, as a lot of us teach, don't fixate on the weapon. Destroy the attacker. In real life it is not like you playing around in the ring. On the street your life may depend on such a situation as this. Make the wrong choice and you could be dead.
> 
> The point of the chest stomp was as *ballen* said, ensuring the attacker was no longer a risk. In a real situation would Tony have done that or picked up the gun? I would have thought that he would still have disabled the attacker as he doesn't know if the gun is loaded or that it isn't an imitation. Would he have done the neck crank? Who know? He is demonstrating that you always have a follow up available.
> 
> What you really mean is that you will *attempt* to choke him out. Only way? You have no idea whether or not he is a more competent grappler than you but you are prepared to bet your life on it. Really? On the street that is an ego trip likely to get you killed.
> 
> Now I hate to disagree with you but what you are saying makes no sense to anyone with any training in this area. Why would you ever attempt a soccer kick to the face? All he has to do is lift his shoulder and your kick is going to slide past. Even if he just turns his head your kick may well slide off. Tony is kicking into the 'V' of his shoulder and neck, much less chance of missing.



so in the hypothetical the kick is going to work and the choke may not. 

is that just because one supports your argument and one doesn't.

why doesn't focusing on the gun work? 

if he is reaching for that gun and can wear that kick,defend that choke dodge the plus ten sword of delight. Then you would be in a bit of trouble.

hypothetical offs are ridiculous for exactly this reason.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i would just give him his gun back. Obviously the guy had just tripped over at the shooting range.


Quit trolling


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> so in the hypothetical the kick is going to work and the choke may not.
> 
> is that just because one supports your argument and one doesn't.
> 
> why doesn't focusing on the gun work?
> 
> if he is reaching for that gun and can wear that kick,defend that choke dodge the plus ten sword of delight. Then you would be in a bit of trouble.
> 
> hypothetical offs are ridiculous for exactly this reason.


Thank you for pointing out my training is ridiculous. I suppose we may as well stop all reality style training and start something else. What do you suggest, knitting? Get a life, you are bagging our training and it is something you don't even do. After answering Hanzou, I'm out of this thread before I say something I could regret.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Quit trolling



you are trying to suggest that you can decide what happens in this scenario and what doesn't. Why cant i?

that is how hypotheticals work. You wanted to go down this path. And now you don't like where it leads?


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Thank you for pointing out my training is ridiculous. I suppose we may as well stop all reality style training and start something else. What do you suggest, knitting? Get a life, you are bagging our training and it is something you don't even do. After answering Hanzou, I'm out of this thread before I say something I could regret.



no i am not. You are desperately trying to be a victim again. 

and considering you threw in a real world not sport comment yourself. You have no legs to stand on.

you said the kick will work and the choke will not. Considering either could be scenario trained. I don't see how that is a slight on the training itself.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say that?


I asked you a direct question as to where you had posted what you claimed to have posted. As you didn't answer that but kept talking along the same vein, I assumed you agreed.



Hanzou said:


> Attempting to follow up a throat kick with a chest stomp and a neck crank   is probably the wrong choice when a gun is laying around. Honestly, it could be the wrong choice when a gun isn't in play. All three of those attacks are pretty low percentage.


Perhaps that's why he didn't do it. 

For you a shin to the neck or a knee to the head might be low percentage. We train that sort of technique all the time. Stomp to the chest following a takedown is bread and butter in Karate and Krav, again a finishing technique we train almost every time. Why do you constantly query the training of everyone who doesn't do BJJ or MMA? Or are you just trying to generate a chuckle like you did in other threads?



Hanzou said:


> Really? If the chest stop ensured that the attacker was out of commission, why did he do a neck crank afterwards?


Obviously it is just an option.  Would he have done that in real life? Obviously that would depend on the situation, but why do I need to explain that. It was explained in the video.



Hanzou said:


> Assuming he is a better grappler, slapping a choke with him on all fours is far less risky than attempting a chest stomp or a standing neck crank with him on his back. If he's a better grappler, you don't want him on his back under any circumstances.


Your opinion! I have no idea what background Tim Larkin's clients have but I would be pretty confident grappling would not be prevalent. His market is similar to Krav and Systema. 

After a kick to the neck or a knee to the head, if that was powerful enough to roll the guy to his back, I don't think you would have any problem finishing with a stomp. A neck crank like that wouldn't be my choice but you use what you train.



Hanzou said:


> So let me get this straight; You're arguing that with your opponent on all fours, the head is an easier target to miss than the neck?


Certainly. All it takes is a shrug of the shoulder and you would miss or at least have the power of the kick severely reduced, again, something we train regularly but obviously not a part of BJJ.

Now I'm out of this thread because you sport guys obviously know far more about these things than those of us who actually train for it.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> no i am not. You are desperately trying to be a victim again.
> 
> and considering you threw in a real world not sport comment yourself. You have no legs to stand on.
> 
> you said the kick will work and the choke will not. Considering either could be scenario trained. I don't see how that is a slight on the training itself.


I'm not a victim. I just can't cope with this much bulls#|t. And seeing that I never said a choke would not work it's obvious that you aren't bothering to read what is being posted. If I had a BJJ background I might think differently but for most MAs, going to the ground should not be first option and for people with little training it is not an option. Now, as I've said, I'm out of here.


----------



## tshadowchaser

Gentlemen please keep the conversations polite and friendly.
We can all agree to disagree without being insulting to one another.
By the way let the filters censor your words that is why they are there


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> you are trying to suggest that you can decide what happens in this scenario and what doesn't. Why cant i?
> 
> that is how hypotheticals work. You wanted to go down this path. And now you don't like where it leads?


Everyone else had no problem discussing the topic like adults your just being a little child who doesn't get his way.  If your not interested in discussing the topic then beat it.  For someone that claims all this experience as a bouncer and security guard and reality based training blah blah blah you sure are not acting like it.  So run along now and let the rest of us have a real discussion


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> I'm not a victim. I just can't cope with this much bulls#|t. And seeing that I never said a choke would not work it's obvious that you aren't bothering to read what is being posted. If I had a BJJ background I might think differently but for most MAs, going to the ground should not be first option and for people with little training it is not an option. Now, as I've said, I'm out of here.



ok so where do you go if that kick doesn't work. Say he gets a hand up or the ground is slippery or you get attacked by his friends?

there are ground options as well as stand up options from there. 

for example if i sprawl on the guy. I am in less danger of getting swept. I can still knee my body is controlling his and i have a hand to go for that gun


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> ok so where do you go if that kick doesn't work. Say he gets a hand up or the ground is slippery or you get attacked by his friends?
> 
> there are ground options as well as stand up options from there.
> 
> for example if i sprawl on the guy. I am in less danger of getting swept. I can still knee my body is controlling his and i have a hand to go for that gun


See that was hard to actually stay on topic.  So you plan is to use your body to pin him down to keep him away from the gun and the some knees?  How is your arm still free to reach the gun.  Where would you sprawl?  Side?front?  I can't think of anyway where you could and still reach the gun before him.  I don't know if I agree with that.  My opinion you want to incapacitate him as fast as you can be it strikes or choked or an arm bar or someway to break him.


----------



## ballen0351

@kman sorry to hear about the hostage situation in your country my prayers are it ends peacefully.  
But that's a real life situation where a scenario could unfold where your fighting over a gun.


----------



## K-man

ballen0351 said:


> @kman sorry to hear about the hostage situation in your country my prayers are it ends peacefully.
> But that's a real life situation where a scenario could unfold where your fighting over a gun.


Thanks mate. They still don't know much about what's happening inside but apparently he has a shotgun. Can't help thinking, if a couple of people in there had some descent Krav training I reckon there's a fair chance it would be over, unless he has explosives as well.


----------



## Steve

ballen0351 said:


> See that was hard to actually stay on topic.  So you plan is to use your body to pin him down to keep him away from the gun and the some knees?  How is your arm still free to reach the gun.  Where would you sprawl?  Side?front?  I can't think of anyway where you could and still reach the gun before him.  I don't know if I agree with that.  My opinion you want to incapacitate him as fast as you can be it strikes or choked or an arm bar or someway to break him.


But others have said that you should not focus on the weapon, but instead should concentrate on destroying the attacker.  Is that now out the window?   I think it should be, but would like to know.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hanzou

Steve said:


> But others have said that you should not focus on the weapon, but instead should concentrate on destroying the attacker.  Is that now out the window?   I think it should be, but would like to know.



Yeah, I'm now confused as well. If he's reaching for the gun, and you kick him away from the gun, shouldn't you then secure the firearm instead of chasing him down and beating him into a pulp?

BTW, I stand by the notion that a kick to the head makes more sense than trying to shin kick him in the throat. Especially if you only have seconds to react, he's moving, and you can't really see the target.


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> But others have said that you should not focus on the weapon, but instead should concentrate on destroying the attacker.  Is that now out the window?   I think it should be, but would like to know.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I  think you are focusing on the weapon by attacking the person.  The weapon alone cant hurt you.  The weapon is the entire reason your destroying the guy.  If there are more people around then your tactics will need to change


----------



## Zero

Seems like once you start discussing what ifs or multiple possible scenarios, any straight answer or one-stop solve it goes out the window, best answer is simply you need to address what ever situation(s) present themselves with the tool kit you have, and hopefully that tool kit (both mental and physical) is sufficiently flexible.

Point in case - Drop bear, you said there would be issues if you went to do the head kick and how this could disadvantage you if the guy had mates present.  I have no issue with grappling in itself but you go on to then suggest a sprawl or to grapple as a better option...let's think that through - if there were other assailants around I would absolutely not go to ground, you're signing your own death sentence, even if you're the greatest bjj guy out there, especially if there is a gun/weapon in play. Surely you see that?  Perhaps more back to what you may be familiar with, if you do any bouncing, have you ever seen a bouncer go to ground in a club or on the street front where there are tanked up mates of an assailant/trouble maker present?  I have never seen that, never, not ever.

If there is just the one guy, immobilise guy, recover gun...unless of course there is greater distance between guy and his gun and you happen to be the closer to the gun (in which case pick up gun and say "stick 'em up jack" (in which case if he was on all fours he would fall on his face, hehe, or shoot him in the knee/face, whatever is legal in your neck of the woods or you feel inclined to do), every scenario has its own responses.

Focusing on the weapon and not immediately negating the opponent, you forget the risk of the opponent having another weapon (do all of us only carry the one weapon, I mean, defence aid? - no! (another gun, bang bang or that knife he sticks into your thigh as you try to kick his gun away). Otherwise, you simply open yourself up to letting him take the fight to you on a more even H2H basis (to always be avoided, stacked decks always best).

If there are numerous assailants, then you need to get rid of (either by claiming or by kicking away, ie under a car, skip bin etc, such as ballen's example) the most immediately dangerous item to you.  One bullet from the gun to your head from his mate while you are merrily neck-cranking and you are gone for good. A kick to your body or even strike to your head while you are kicking away the gun you have a better percentage from rolling with and continuing the fight.  You then take the fight to the opponent that is the most immediate threat and then take it from there.

All the above is correct, and that's guaranteed.

....K-Man, K-Man, are you there, are you really "out of this thread"???!!??      : )


----------



## Zero

Yes, as someone else said, and a bit of a derail, but genuine thoughts with K-Man and his countrymen for what went down in Sydney today, some upsetting newer reports of the end-result coming through...very bad, upsetting and annoying stuff.


----------



## Zero

In Drop bears defence, I do think he was only joking re handing the gun back and not trolling there.

...I almost made a crack myself about the guy on all four's pose way back, it just doesn't look right on any level.  More like something to be strenuously avoided in some male-only club, unless that's your thing, in which case, no offence.


----------



## K-man

Zero said:


> ....K-Man, K-Man, are you there, are you really "out of this thread"???!!??      : )


Yep! I'll leave it to the armchair experts. Those of us that actually teach and train this stuff obviously wouldn't have a clue. I said all I had to say about it earlier in the thread so I'll just sit back and watch. 

Where is my 'popcorn' emoticon?


----------



## K-man

Zero said:


> Yes, as someone else said, and a bit of a derail, but genuine thoughts with K-Man and his countrymen for what went down in Sydney today, some upsetting newer reports of the end-result coming through...very bad, upsetting and annoying stuff.


Yes, sad really when it turns out that this guy is a Muslim cleric whom we gave asylum to years back. He was a guy sending hate mail to families of our soldiers killed in Afghanistan and is on bail for other offences. Some people just don't deserve a second chance.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> Point in case - Drop bear, you said there would be issues if you went to do the head kick and how this could disadvantage you if the guy had mates present.  I have no issue with grappling in itself but you go on to then suggest a sprawl or to grapple as a better option...let's think that through - if there were other assailants around I would absolutely not go to ground, you're signing your own death sentence, even if you're the greatest bjj guy out there, especially if there is a gun/weapon in play. Surely you see that?  Perhaps more back to what you may be familiar with, if you do any bouncing, have you ever seen a bouncer go to ground in a club or on the street front where there are tanked up mates of an assailant/trouble maker present?  I have never seen that, never, not ever.



In Drop Bear's defense, Tony Larkin performed a standing neck crank, and completely ignored the weapon, so clearly grappling is an option in that scenario.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

_*ATTENTION ALL USERS: Please, return to the original topic.

-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Moderator-*_


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*First off very sorry to all my Australian friends and especially the families involved in the tragedy that happened today.  Thoughts and prayers to all of you in this time of grieving.

*

We are going to stay on topic here and follow the rules.  I am however going to leave the moderating here from now on to others because I find this particular topic interesting to be involved in the conversation and I was asked early on for some input.

If someone is down on all fours and reaching for a gun and you are lined up as in the video then a kick to the head would be a great option in my opinion.  I would not be kicking for the throat but instead the jaw line and head in general.  Typically this would be a fight ender if you make contact.  Totally confident if I make contact it is lights out from this angle.  If I was at an angle where the head was not a viable target then I could see engaging in grappling ie. being first to the gun, taking the back and taking the gun in the process, etc.  All of that would depend though if it was just a one on one encounter because if there were a lot of people around in combat I wouldn't want to be tied up on the ground where my mobility was limited.  I could also see just knocking him over and away from the hand gun and taking it in the process.  I could see drawing my backup weapon/tool and finishing the situation. 

We are always going to be in conversations and training where "what if" this happened.  Quite often I use the phrase their are "no absolutes".  Meaning that in one situation what would be the perfect solution will end up possibly getting you killed in another.  Not everything will work all the time.  You had better have some options!  Our training should be flexible, varied and dynamic so that in a moment of violence the proper solution will happen and we will be able to survive!  Just my 02.


----------



## Zero

Brian R. VanCise said:


> We are going to stay on topic here and follow the rules.  I am however going to leave the moderating here from now on to others because I find this particular topic interesting to be involved in the conversation and I was asked early on for some input.
> 
> If someone is down on all fours and reaching for a gun and you are lined up as in the video then a kick to the head would be a great option in my opinion.  I would not be kicking for the throat but instead the jaw line and head in general.  Typically this would be a fight ender if you make contact.  Totally confident if I make contact it is lights out from this angle.  If I was at an angle where the head was not a viable target then I could see engaging in grappling ie. being first to the gun, taking the back and taking the gun in the process, etc.  All of that would depend though if it was just a one on one encounter because if there were a lot of people around in combat I wouldn't want to be tied up on the ground where my mobility was limited.  I could also see just knocking him over and away from the hand gun and taking it in the process.  I could see drawing my backup weapon/tool and finishing the situation.
> 
> We are always going to be in conversations and training where "what if" this happened.  Quite often I use the phrase their are "no absolutes".  Meaning that in one situation what would be the perfect solution will end up possibly getting you killed in another.  Not everything will work all the time.  You had better have some options!  Our training should be flexible, varied and dynamic so that in a moment of violence the proper solution will happen and we will be able to survive!  Just my 02.



The voice of reason has spoken, amen.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> In Drop Bear's defense, Tony Larkin performed a standing neck crank, and completely ignored the weapon, so clearly grappling is an option in that scenario.


Huh??  How does that defend Drop bear?  Are you saying that Larkin is the expert or font of all knowledge on these things?
Anything is an _option _Hanzou - it may be just a completely ***** option...pulling out a tube of toothpaste and offering to brush his teeth is an option, will probably make you a goner though.


----------



## Hanzou

I'm saying that Larkin made it apparent that grappling was an option in that scenario, since he did it himself.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I'm saying that Larkin made it apparent that grappling was an option in that scenario, since he did it himself.


I agree in my opinion the best option is what your best trained in.  For me Grappling wouldnt be my first choice.  For others that are more comfortable it may be grappling.   If I were to grapple Id go more for something to quickly destroy the shoulder or elbow more the trying to pin and hold or choke out.


----------



## Hanzou

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *If someone is down on all fours and reaching for a gun and you are lined up as in the video then a kick to the head would be a great option in my opinion.*  I would not be kicking for the throat but instead the jaw line and head in general.  Typically this would be a fight ender if you make contact.  Totally confident if I make contact it is lights out from this angle.  If I was at an angle where the head was not a viable target then I could see engaging in grappling ie. being first to the gun, taking the back and taking the gun in the process, etc.  All of that would depend though if it was just a one on one encounter because if there were a lot of people around in combat I wouldn't want to be tied up on the ground where my mobility was limited.  I could also see just knocking him over and away from the hand gun and taking it in the process.  I could see drawing my backup weapon/tool and finishing the situation.
> 
> We are always going to be in conversations and training where "what if" this happened.  Quite often I use the phrase their are "no absolutes".  Meaning that in one situation what would be the perfect solution will end up possibly getting you killed in another.  Not everything will work all the time.  You had better have some options!  Our training should be flexible, varied and dynamic so that in a moment of violence the proper solution will happen and we will be able to survive!  Just my 02.



Thanks for the post Brian. I was starting to think I was living in the twilight zone, where a specialized kick to a small target makes more sense than a basic kick to a big target.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Thanks for the post Brian. I was starting to think I was living in the twilight zone, where a specialized kick to a small target makes more sense than a basic kick to a big target.


Aim small, miss small.  I might aim for the neck but I dont care where it lands as long as it works


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Aim small, miss small.  I might aim for the neck but I dont care where it lands as long as it works



In that situation shown in the video where your goal is to do as much damage as possible, would you attempt a shin kick to the throat, or a kick to the head/face?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> In that situation shown in the video where your goal is to do as much damage as possible, would you attempt a shin kick to the throat, or a kick to the head/face?


I don't Like to do shin kicks.  So I'm kicking as hard as I can at your face/head.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> I'm saying that Larkin made it apparent that grappling was an option in that scenario, since he did it himself.


Thanks, understood.  Still think there are options that range across the success spectrum and not necessarily all those put forward by Larkin are at the top of the percentile.


----------



## Zero

ballen0351 said:


> I don't Like to do shin kicks.  So I'm kicking as hard as I can at your face/head.


Shin kicks are great but, agreed, why bother if you have boots or hard toed shoes on?  I am still going for the head, for the reasons I and others have put forward, but I guess as an aside if you connected with maximum force with boots or hard pointed shoes to the throat it could very well end in death, stoved in larynx territory, it's not going to be pretty in any event.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> See that was hard to actually stay on topic.  So you plan is to use your body to pin him down to keep him away from the gun and the some knees?  How is your arm still free to reach the gun.  Where would you sprawl?  Side?front?  I can't think of anyway where you could and still reach the gun before him.  I don't know if I agree with that.  My opinion you want to incapacitate him as fast as you can be it strikes or choked or an arm bar or someway to break him.



sprawling is a position rather than a technique in this case. So i can move around his whole body. So from here hit him from the side. Scoot around to block his path to the gun. 

the idea behind this position is that it is designed so he defends in turtle while i feed him punches and knees. So i can generally get a hand or foot free. 

as far as disabling strikes. I throw as many as i need. 

i can even jump back up kick him in the head and then sprawl back down so he doesn't go anywhere.


----------



## drop bear

cant find really good gnp from turtle so this will do for now. He does lock off the head and arm. You don't have to roll him into a submission. You can just sit north south from there. And have a hand free.


----------



## Tez3

How nice an simple it all is when watching a video or describing how to defeat your 'attacker', shame it's so messy in reality.


----------



## drop bear

another example of positions. Normally you wouldn't go from the side to north south. Because you are a bit safer. But there is nothing stopping you if you wanted to block that path to the gun.

and a top side sub. Which is pretty rare from here.


----------



## Hanzou

Nice vids Drops Bear. Pretty much what I was thinking of choke-wise. Guillotine or RNC, or some variation should work in that situation.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Nice vids Drops Bear. Pretty much what I was thinking of choke-wise. Guillotine or RNC, or some variation should work in that situation.



a flattened out rear naked would be good. I mean if i  get hooks in and just keep him on his stomach it should work. I would want that gun secured first though.

there is a head arm where you just stay north south. 

by the way for everybody else. When we are talking about these submissions we are not ignoring strikes eyegouges or pressure points. But they are added on after we gain a good control of the guy.

but every chance i get i will feed him.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> a flattened out rear naked would be good. I mean if i  get hooks in and just keep him on his stomach it should work. I would want that gun secured first though.
> 
> there is a head arm where you just stay north south.
> 
> by the way for everybody else. When we are talking about these submissions we are not ignoring strikes eyegouges or pressure points. But they are added on after we gain a good control of the guy.
> 
> *but every chance i get i will feed him*.



As he will you...........


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Tez3 said:


> How nice an simple it all is when watching a video or describing how to defeat your 'attacker', shame it's so messy in reality.



Absolutely Tez3, real violence is very, very, very messy and we both know that it never quite looks like what we practiced in the Training Hall!


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> As he will you...........



from his non dominant position?


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> sprawling is a position rather than a technique in this case. So i can move around his whole body. So from here hit him from the side. Scoot around to block his path to the gun.
> 
> the idea behind this position is that it is designed so he defends in turtle while i feed him punches and knees. So i can generally get a hand or foot free.
> 
> as far as disabling strikes. I throw as many as i need.
> 
> i can even jump back up kick him in the head and then sprawl back down so he doesn't go anywhere.



Thanks for the vids Drop bear.  I know I am sounding like I am just blowing old wind but I was always taught and drilled to end an altercation in a SD situation, or anything other than a ring event, quick as possible, with the least strikes, techs as possible.  I thus have concern with this idea of getting in sprawl and moving about wailing on the guy and "throwing as many as I need" - this makes it sound like you seem to have an on-going window of opportunity here, both to inflict damage and to avoid it yourself either from the guy or others.
I ain't no SD expert or anything of the sort but have trained with those that supposedly are and have a bit of real world experience (I simply state that as many people and MAsts don't, including such SD experts...).  I have been in real SD situations where I have been attacked (one involving four assailants), one situation where I immobilised a fleeing shoplifter who had broken through several security guards and members of the public and when younger several street and party fights and altercations (the street fights and pub brawls all which I could have avoided but was younger and less inclined to being sensible).  I have a pretty good idea of how quickly things can go south and how brutal things can be.  That said, I do not have any involvement where a gun was involved.
I am a solid judoka alongside my years of karate and strike fighting and have used submissions, arm bars and guillotines in freestyle and mma tournaments  and see myself adequate/average in the grappling game, I am not coming at this from just an ignorant stand-up perspective.  All I am saying from my training and actual real experiences, I would not be advocating this idea of "feeding punches and knees etc" in some sprawl or otherwise going to the ground or tying myself up in a move that took more than a second or so to employ (it should actually be much less if possible, when I was jumped by the four guys I put my fist through three of their faces and dropped them in what must have been one second tops, I couldn't even remember doing it). Whatever it is you are going to use, it needs to brutal, it needs to be sudden, it needs to be simple and it needs to be over.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Thanks for the vids Drop bear.  I know I am sounding like I am just blowing old wind but I was always taught and drilled to end an altercation in a SD situation, or anything other than a ring event, quick as possible, with the least strikes, techs as possible.  I thus have concern with this idea of getting in sprawl and moving about wailing on the guy and "throwing as many as I need" - this makes it sound like you seem to have an on-going window of opportunity here, both to inflict damage and to avoid it yourself either from the guy or others.
> I ain't no SD expert or anything of the sort but have trained with those that supposedly are and have a bit of real world experience (I simply state that as many people and MAsts don't, including such SD experts...).  I have been in real SD situations where I have been attacked (one involving four assailants), one situation where I immobilised a fleeing shoplifter who had broken through several security guards and members of the public and when younger several street and party fights and altercations (the street fights and pub brawls all which I could have avoided but was younger and less inclined to being sensible).  I have a pretty good idea of how quickly things can go south and how brutal things can be.  That said, I do not have any involvement where a gun was involved.
> I am a solid judoka alongside my years of karate and strike fighting and have used submissions, arm bars and guillotines in freestyle and mma tournaments  and see myself adequate/average in the grappling game, I am not coming at this from just an ignorant stand-up perspective.  All I am saying from my training and actual real experiences, I would not be advocating this idea of "feeding punches and knees etc" in some sprawl or otherwise going to the ground or tying myself up in a move that took more than a second or so to employ. Whatever it is you are going to use, it needs to brutal, it needs to be sudden and it needs to be over.



all of those strikes i have mentioned have the potential to knock someone out. At which point the fight is over and i don't have to bother with the rest of it.

everybody wants a quick win.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> from his non dominant position?



and you do MMA?


----------



## drop bear

Sorry cant edit cos phone.

from those positions i can stand back up pretty quick. The other guy will struggle to stop me. But if I do he can stand up and i no longer get free shots on him.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> and you do MMA?



yes. And i have never seen defensive striking from someone in turtle.

i am interested to read how this is done.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> yes. And i have never seen defensive striking from someone in turtle.
> 
> i am interested to read how this is done.



You are assuming he's going to stay exactly where you put him so you can begin your triumphal battering of him?


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> all of those strikes i have mentioned have the potential to knock someone out. At which point the fight is over and i don't have to bother with the rest of it.
> 
> everybody wants a quick win.


Great.  Why do you have to go into sprawl to then execute those knock-out strikes?  What am I missing here?
I've found from my tournament fighting that while they can be a knock-out, generally my strikes (or of those wailing on me) don't have quite the same power or knock-out percentage as a clean strike executed outside of grappling in a ground or other than standing position (my viewing of UFC, Strike Force, Pride etc would support that as well).  That's a generalisation obviously.  I am not talking about being in clinch and then releasing to deliver a knock-out upper cut, etc. But from delivering blows when tied up with opponent or in sprawl proximity.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> You are assuming he's going to stay exactly where you put him so you can begin your triumphal battering of him?



that is the point of trying to get that dominant position. Yes.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> that is the point of trying to get that dominant position. Yes.




Ok good luck with that then.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Great.  Why do you have to go into sprawl to then execute those knock-out strikes?  What am I missing here?
> I've found from my tournament fighting that while they can be a knock-out, generally my strikes (or of those wailing on me) don't have quite the same power or knock-out percentage as a clean strike executed outside of grappling in a ground or other than standing position (my viewing of UFC, Strike Force, Pride etc would support that as well).  That's a generalisation obviously.  I am not talking about being in clinch and then releasing to deliver a knock-out upper cut, etc. But from delivering blows when tied up with opponent or in sprawl proximity.



in a fifty fifty. But aren't you in more danger of being knocked out as well?

that is like suggesting standing toe to toe is the best for self defense because the fight will end more quickly.

i could point this out with a mma ko compilation video.

but which guy are you? The one getting that flush shot or the one eating it.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Ok good luck with that then.



You wouldn't try to get a dominant position?


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> in a fifty fifty. But aren't you in more danger of being knocked out as well?
> 
> that is like suggesting standing toe to toe is the best for self defense because the fight will end more quickly.
> 
> i could point this out with a mma ko compilation video.
> 
> but which guy are you? The one getting that flush shot or the one eating it.


Drop bear, the scenario was not 50/50, the guy who'd dropped the gun was on all fours...why are you sprawling on him and then delivering blows.  In that position how is he an immediate knock-out threat to you - unless you lower yourself (sprawl) onto him...?


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Drop bear, the scenario was not 50/50, the guy who'd dropped the gun was on all fours...why are you sprawling on him and then delivering blows.  In that position how is he an immediate knock-out threat to you - unless you lower yourself (sprawl) onto him...?



you kick him in the head. It doesn't work. He stands up. Or in this case grabs the gun.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> in a fifty fifty. But aren't you in more danger of being knocked out as well?
> 
> that is like suggesting standing toe to toe is the best for self defense because the fight will end more quickly.
> 
> i could point this out with a mma ko compilation video.
> 
> but which guy are you? The one getting that flush shot or the one eating it.



I have never been trained or been taught to avoid ending the altercation as quickly as possible to avoid the chance of yourself being knocked out.  Sure there are layers of techniques you can employ given the scenario facing you and to keep you most protected.  You keep yourself protected best you can but the goal is to finish the whole event quick as possible.

No one is suggesting "standing toe to toe" with anyone, you seem to still be just in "tournament mode" and not dealing with a SD scenario.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> I have never been trained or been taught to avoid ending the altercation as quickly as possible to avoid the chance of yourself being knocked out.  Sure there are layers of techniques you can employ given the scenario facing you and to keep you most protected.  You keep yourself protected best you can but the goal is to finish the whole event quick as possible.
> 
> No one is suggesting "standing toe to toe" with anyone, you seem to still be just in "tournament mode" and not dealing with a SD scenario.



nobody has. Prolonging a fight is not a tournament mode thing.

standing toe to to is a great way of ending a fight quickly. In theory i could just bull rush the guy and have a really high chance of finishing that fight quickly. But it is high risk that is all.

i am not sure if I would fight high risk in self defence. I would want to be really confident in my striking.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> in a fifty fifty. But aren't you in more danger of being knocked out as well?
> 
> that is like suggesting standing toe to toe is the best for self defense because the fight will end more quickly.
> 
> *i could point this out with a mma ko compilation video*.
> 
> but which guy are you? The one getting that flush shot or the one eating it.



But it's not an MMA competition is it, there's no arm being lifted by the ref at the end. You talk like it's a competition where you can get the win, there are legal considerations too, here at least self defence has to be reasonable, punching the hell out of a guy who is no threat to you is not reasonable, putting yourself back into an altercation because you want to batter your attacker after you have controlled him is not a reasonable thing to do either legally, morally or in common sense terms. If you have never seen anyone punch back in turtle why are you punching him?


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> you kick him in the head. It doesn't work. He stands up. Or in this case grabs the gun.


I still don't follow this, how is this 50/50 given his position?  You kick him in the head, it doesn't work, you take it from there and kick him again or do something else that is "on".  How has that resulted in you failing or in a situation where the kick initially should be avoided?

I think the kick to the head and failing still has you in a better position than your go to sprawl, and the sprawl failing...oh wait, are you saying that you are 100% sure your execution of the "sprawl-and-pound" you are advocating is not going to fail?    Surely you are not (or, wait, are you)...

...Super Man?

Sure where he manages to get the gun - and to turn it on you - will then that is a universal bummer man!  Whatever you have done has gone stupendously wrong.  That much agreed!  That said, you also need to be mentally prepared for that scenario, don't think you are not going to get shot or stabbed or face smashed.  You can be shot and still survive but possibly not if you are not prepared for that and simply give out at that stage.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Zero said:


> ...when I was jumped by the four guys I put my fist through three of their faces and dropped them in what must have been one second tops, I couldn't even remember doing it). Whatever it is you are going to use, it needs to brutal, it needs to be sudden, it needs to be simple and it needs to be over.



I think we all agree that we would like to be able to finish a fight in a second. Unfortunately, I don't think it's necessarily something we can rely on.

Some people will go down instantly from one decent punch and be out of the fight.

Some people will take an incredible battering (including strikes to vital targets) and keep going.

Some people will take lethal knife and gunshot wounds and keep fighting until they eventually bleed out.

You can go for the quick finish, but you have to be prepared for it not working out.

BTW - a knee to the head from that top sprawl position drop bear is advocating can be as quick a knockout as any other move I can think of.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> nobody has. Prolonging a fight is not a tournament mode thing.
> 
> standing toe to to is a great way of ending a fight quickly. In theory i could just bull rush the guy and have a really high chance of finishing that fight quickly. But it is high risk that is all.
> 
> i am not sure if I would fight high risk in self defence. I would want to be really confident in my striking.



I never advocated anything high risk.  I don't see the head kick as high risk on the scale of things and on the basis you don't have a gun or other weapon.  The head kick is one of the lower risk options.  

Again, you are the one talking about standing toe to toe, I don't see this as a toe-to-toe situation with the guy on all fours and you delivering (or attempting to deliver) a head kick so I don't follow where you are coming from on that.


----------



## drop bear

Ok. I did a thread on outfighting for mma after a seminar with a bit of a guru on the subject. And there is all sorts of points made about percentage fighting. But it is a ring thing not a sd thing.

then i found the reactionary gap. Which preaches the same thing.





but out fighting does not push the fight which means you will prolong it. 

now of course outfighting is not going to help here because you have to separate that guy from that gun. But the idea of fighting in as safe a manner as you can does.

even if it prolongs the fight.

i would be very hesitant to recommend high risk high reward fighting unless there is a good reason to do so.

so if that gun was up and he was about to shoot a puppy. Go for a hail Mary kick. But if you can get him in a position he cant fight back from


----------



## Zero

Tony Dismukes said:


> I think we all agree that we would like to be able to finish a fight in a second. Unfortunately, I don't think it's necessarily something we can rely on.
> 
> Some people will go down instantly from one decent punch and be out of the fight.
> 
> Some people will take an incredible battering (including strikes to vital targets) and keep going.
> 
> Some people will take lethal knife and gunshot wounds and keep fighting until they eventually bleed out.
> 
> You can go for the quick finish, but you have to be prepared for it not working out.
> 
> BTW - a knee to the head from that top sprawl position drop bear is advocating can be as quick a knockout as any other move I can think of.



Agreed with all of that.  But...the knee to head from top sprawl is not as quick a technique as the kick to head in that situation. There I disagree.

The actual movement of the knee, sure, but not the overall tech.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> Ok. I did a thread on outfighting for mma after a seminar with a bit of a guru on the subject. And there is all sorts of points made about percentage fighting. But it is a ring thing not a sd thing.
> 
> then i found the reactionary gap. Which preaches the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but out fighting does not push the fight which means you will prolong it.
> 
> now of course outfighting is not going to help here because you have to separate that guy from that gun. But the idea of fighting in as safe a manner as you can does.
> 
> even if it prolongs the fight.
> 
> i would be very hesitant to recommend high risk high reward fighting unless there is a good reason to do so.
> 
> so if that gun was up and he was about to shoot a puppy. Go for a hail Mary kick. But if you can get him in a position he cant fight back from


Again, I never said or recommended high risk moves, I don't think anyone else here did either.
Now you are talking about a different scenario with gun in hand.  I have only been talking about the initial vid of the Op.


----------



## Zero

Tony Dismukes said:


> You can go for the quick finish, but you have to be prepared for it not working out.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> Agreed. But if it is a strong potential quick finish, no point not going for it in the first place.  As said, if needed, you then take it from there and need to be prepared to do so.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> I still don't follow this, how is this 50/50 given his position?  You kick him in the head, it doesn't work, you take it from there and kick him again or do something else that is "on".  How has that resulted in you failing or in a situation where the kick initially should be avoided?
> 
> I think the kick to the head and failing still has you in a better position than your go to sprawl, and the sprawl failing...oh wait, are you saying that you are 100% sure your execution of the "sprawl-and-pound" you are advocating is not going to fail?    Surely you are not (or, wait, are you)...
> 
> ...Super Man?
> 
> Sure where he manages to get the gun - and to turn it on you - will then that is a universal bummer man!  Whatever you have done has gone stupendously wrong.  That much agreed!  That said, you also need to be mentally prepared for that scenario, don't think you are not going to get shot or stabbed or face smashed.  You can be shot and still survive but possibly not if you are not prepared for that and simply give out at that stage.



i can do both. I even said that. But i want that guy secured in a position i control if i can.

if my sprawl fails i can stand up kick him sprawl again.


----------



## Zero

Hmmm, just when I thought I'd got the hang of things, I seem to be quoting Tony D and myself now, I always loathed self-quoting   : )


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> i can do both. I even said that. But i want that guy secured in a position i control if i can.
> 
> if my sprawl fails i can stand up kick him sprawl again.



OK.  I guess we have differing views then, or maybe not, on this situation and possibly SD and responses in general.  I think we definitely have different experience with SD.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> But it's not an MMA competition is it, there's no arm being lifted by the ref at the end. You talk like it's a competition where you can get the win, there are legal considerations too, here at least self defence has to be reasonable, punching the hell out of a guy who is no threat to you is not reasonable, putting yourself back into an altercation because you want to batter your attacker after you have controlled him is not a reasonable thing to do either legally, morally or in common sense terms. If you have never seen anyone punch back in turtle why are you punching him?



just because it is not a competition does not mean the concepts go out the window. In the street these concepts still apply. 

i am striking him to prevent him getting that gun. Assault by kicking is an extra offence. Assault by neck crank?

legally what are you comparing this too?


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> OK.  I guess we have differing views then, or maybe not, on this situation and possibly SD and responses in general.  I think we definitely have different experience with SD.



ok the last time i fought a weapon off a guy. A mate of mine did kick him in the head. But i was also wrestling with him.

i posted a thread on it.

by the way the mate who kicked him had no martial arts experience at all. So i am not sure who would pay to learn kick in the head.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Zero said:


> Agreed with all of that.  But...the knee to head from top sprawl is not as quick a technique as the kick to head in that situation. There I disagree.
> 
> The actual movement of the knee, sure, but not the overall tech.



Well, yeah, you have to add the time for reaching the sprawl position in the first place. I meant once you are in the top position, then it's as fast of a finish as any standing move.

It's all trade-offs.

Kick to the head: Advantages: might be the fastest possible finish if you connect right, staying upright means you have better mobility and visibility. Disadvantages: If you *don't *at least stun the guy then you have no control to keep him from standing back up or scrambling for the gun. Also there's a slight risk of him grabbing your leg and taking you down.

Sprawl & control from top while striking: Advantages: Better odds of keeping the guy from standing up, moving towards the gun, or striking back. Disadvantages: Takes slightly longer, decreased mobility and visibility (which might be a factor if someone else is present to snatch up the gun.)

I do think the scenario is a bit contrived. If something like that occurred in real life, I think there are too many variables to call beforehand the "correct" response. I'd probably prioritize getting between the bad guy and the gun and then improvise from there, whether that involved striking, grappling, or some combination of the two.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> just because it is not a competition does not mean the concepts go out the window. In the street these concepts still apply.
> 
> i am striking him to prevent him getting that gun. Assault by kicking is an extra offence. Assault by neck crank?
> 
> legally what are you comparing this too?




It is an interesting thing though isn't it? 

In that initial situation and immediately delivering a head-kick, if you are successful you have negated the threat and may well be within the realms of legitimate self defence (you have acted immediately when faced with an assailant with a weapon and where you feared for your own safety and life, that may be seen as reasonable).  It could get more complicated from a legal, criminal law point of view if you had been seen to control the assailant with a sprawl or control technique and then continued to rain blows hell marry on him, particularly if there were witnesses.  Optically that could well play out worse for you when you get your moment in court.


----------



## Steve

Striking him to prevent him from getting the gun is, I think, what ballen was talking about, as well.

I don't know how we got to the point of the sprawl... missed that transition in the conversation... but a sprawl does three things that I would think we can all agree on:

1:  It's a solid defense against the takedown.  If you don't sprawl, you are probably on your back, which we can all agree is a bad thing.

2:  It controls bad guy's head.  Where the head goes, so goes the body. 

3:  It provides a top position from which you can stand VERY quickly. 

The rest is getting too deep in the weeds, I think.  Will a sprawl *always* be *the best* technique to use?  Of course not.  Is it sport only?  Absolutely not.  There is real world application here.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Again, I never said or recommended high risk moves, I don't think anyone else here did either.
> Now you are talking about a different scenario with gun in hand.  I have only been talking about the initial vid of the Op.



how do you finish that fight quickly?


----------



## Zero

Tony Dismukes said:


> Well, yeah, you have to add the time for reaching the sprawl position in the first place. I meant once you are in the top position, then it's as fast of a finish as any standing move.



Thank you. 


Knocking the guy over the head with a crow bar is just as quick as the kick also, if you take off that little important beginning part of going to the hardware store purchasing said crow bar and then going back to the bad guy waiting on all fours like some poor impersonation of a sick pooch (if you can "impersonate" a pooch?).
Just kidding with you there Tony D and being a dawk, I couldn't help it though  : )


----------



## Zero

Tony Dismukes said:


> Well, yeah, you have to add the time for reaching the sprawl position in the first place. I meant once you are in the top position, then it's as fast of a finish as any standing move.
> 
> It's all trade-offs.
> 
> Kick to the head: Advantages: might be the fastest possible finish if you connect right, staying upright means you have better mobility and visibility. Disadvantages: If you *don't *at least stun the guy then you have no control to keep him from standing back up or scrambling for the gun. Also there's a slight risk of him grabbing your leg and taking you down.
> 
> Sprawl & control from top while striking: Advantages: Better odds of keeping the guy from standing up, moving towards the gun, or striking back. Disadvantages: Takes slightly longer, decreased mobility and visibility (which might be a factor if someone else is present to snatch up the gun.)
> 
> I do think the scenario is a bit contrived. If something like that occurred in real life, I think there are too many variables to call beforehand the "correct" response. I'd probably prioritize getting between the bad guy and the gun and then improvise from there, whether that involved striking, grappling, or some combination of the two.




Just out of interest Tony D, and you may have answered already earlier (and you are welcome to fib but please don't) - but on a gut feel, what would be your immediate response to this (what I agree is a some what contrived) position?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Zero said:


> Thank you.
> 
> 
> Knocking the guy over the head with a crow bar is just as quick as the kick also, if you take off that little important beginning part of going to the hardware store purchasing said crow bar and then going back to the bad guy waiting on all fours like some poor impersonation of a sick pooch (if you can "impersonate" a pooch?).
> Just kidding with you there Tony D and being a dawk, I couldn't help it though  : )



What, you aren't carrying the crowbar around with you at all times to begin with?  C'mon now, martial arts training is about being prepared!


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> how do you finish that fight quickly?



What fight Drop bear, the one in the separate vid you have just posted now?


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> It is an interesting thing though isn't it?
> 
> In that initial situation and immediately delivering a head-kick, if you are successful you have negated the threat and may well be within the realms of legitimate self defence (you have acted immediately when faced with an assailant with a weapon and where you feared for your own safety and life, that may be seen as reasonable).  It could get more complicated from a legal, criminal law point of view if you had been seen to control the assailant with a sprawl or control technique and then continued to rain blows hell marry on him, particularly if there were witnesses.  Optically that could well play out worse for you when you get your moment in court.



as opposed to a soccer kick, chest stomp,neck crank?


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> What fight Drop bear, the one in the separate vid you have just posted now?



any fight.

that one you are not prolonging.


----------



## drop bear

Steve said:


> Striking him to prevent him from getting the gun is, I think, what ballen was talking about, as well.
> 
> I don't know how we got to the point of the sprawl... missed that transition in the conversation... but a sprawl does three things that I would think we can all agree on:
> 
> 1:  It's a solid defense against the takedown.  If you don't sprawl, you are probably on your back, which we can all agree is a bad thing.
> 
> 2:  It controls bad guy's head.  Where the head goes, so goes the body.
> 
> 3:  It provides a top position from which you can stand VERY quickly.
> 
> The rest is getting too deep in the weeds, I think.  Will a sprawl *always* be *the best* technique to use?  Of course not.  Is it sport only?  Absolutely not.  There is real world application here.



there was a suggestion that there were no grappling options because the street.


----------



## Zero

Steve said:


> Striking him to prevent him from getting the gun is, I think, what ballen was talking about, as well.
> 
> I don't know how we got to the point of the sprawl... missed that transition in the conversation... but a sprawl does three things that I would think we can all agree on:
> 
> 1:  It's a solid defense against the takedown.  If you don't sprawl, you are probably on your back, which we can all agree is a bad thing.
> 
> 2:  It controls bad guy's head.  Where the head goes, so goes the body.
> 
> 3:  It provides a top position from which you can stand VERY quickly.
> 
> The rest is getting too deep in the weeds, I think.  Will a sprawl *always* be *the best* technique to use?  Of course not.  Is it sport only?  Absolutely not.  There is real world application here.



Maybe Steve,  we are all just obviously going to come at this with the primary experience, training (maybe some baggage) of the style  or sport we train in most and even despite doing specific SD training on top of that.

Maybe a guy who focuses mainly on ground work is going to see a more immediate threat of a take down from trying to execute a head kick and so to negate that would go for the sprawl and pound option to minimise that risk.  And no offense but it makes sense if they are not a well versed kicker to maybe not rate their chances of pulling of the kick in the first place.  Maybe a kicker isn't going to be as fussed about that and will just go for the kick - and hopefully if that fails take it from there.  Even if the kicker is a good grappler, that option may strike them as too messy or convoluted compared to just the kick.

So there you have it.


_Rider:_
But seriously though, the kick is the one to go for, please don't go for this sprawl and control thingy option if you find yourself on the street in this situation, particularly if there are multiples about.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> just because it is not a competition does not mean the concepts go out the window. In the street these concepts still apply.
> 
> i am striking him to prevent him getting that gun. Assault by kicking is an extra offence. Assault by neck crank?
> 
> _legally what are you comparing this too_?



I've no idea what you are saying, 'legally' I put in my post that here you have to use 'reasonable force' to defend yourself against attack, that mean you can attack first btw but it means that once you have controlled the situation you don't then go in for the sprawl and beat the guy up.
'In the street' an expression that actually means nothing. Most 'street' fights I've ever seen were between willing participants rather than 'attackers and defenders'.


----------



## Hanzou

Like I said, a choke is the only way to be sure. Regardless of size, weight, height, etc. everyone needs air.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> any fight.
> 
> that one you are not prolonging.



Ah that fight, I don't even see that as what I would call a fight, but let's not go into the whole "fight" / "SD" thing for now   : )

With what ever option is on Drop Bear, it could be a suplex or throw through the shop plate-glass window (a mate of mine, a bloody good judoka (his older brother was a national gold medallist), did just this when he was bull-rushed at a party and he put the guy through some French doors), I am fairly good at throwing people and take downs from years of judo.  From my experience of what works quickly it will generally involve a lot of blunt trauma (in blunt I mean from use of body impact, in not having a blade on you), such as that soccer kick to the head you are so leery of or a fist right through their face.  I would like to back myself to even being able to rip out some guy's throat with my teeth and tearing out their eyes if it is on and if it is what is immediately needed, if I found myself locked in a conflict with several opponents or someone putting my life in immediate danger.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> there was a suggestion that there were no grappling options because the street.



Who made such a suggestion, where?

PS: it wasn't the "street", it was some shonky back room of a gym with some passable production skills and the presentation of a supposedly believable SD situation and response.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Like I said, a choke is the only way to be sure. Regardless of size, weight, height, etc. everyone needs air.



Hmmm, so a knock out blow doesn't = KO?
Or like Drop Bear have you also morphed into Super Man so you are 100% sure you can work that choke?  A few posts back in another thread you yourself said to be good at any throw you needed to be good at 20 other techniques, in case that throw didn't work.  Aren't you going to apply that same logic to this choke of yours?

Regardless of size?  Correct, but you gonna go for that choke and get all up close and personal on that 6.5ft 300 pound rhino of a bloke with a neck like a bison?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I've no idea what you are saying, 'legally' I put in my post that here you have to use 'reasonable force' to defend yourself against attack, that mean you can attack first btw but it means that once you have controlled the situation you don't then go in for the sprawl and beat the guy up.
> 'In the street' an expression that actually means nothing. Most 'street' fights I've ever seen were between willing participants rather than 'attackers and defenders'.



yeah but i am actually quote a source.
Assault violence offences VIC Criminal legal

now if i cause the same damage punching the guy as kicking him. In the head. And especially on the deck.i have committed a bigger crime.

you are looking at the legalities far too simply. Yes there will be circumstances where gnp is not legally defendable. But saying all gnp is not legally defendable,is not really true.

and is a big side tangent to be throwing out there.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Zero said:


> Just out of interest Tony D, and you may have answered already earlier (and you are welcome to fib but please don't) - but on a gut feel, what would be your immediate response to this (what I agree is a some what contrived) position?



 I actually did give an answer at the end of the bit of mine that you just quoted.

That said, I went back and re-watched the video. He set up the scenario so that the bad guy had his hand practically to the gun, so my original answer about getting between him and the weapon doesn't apply.

I don't think I would gamble on leading off with the kick. With the setup as shown if the kick doesn't do the job completely then there is nothing to stop the bad guy from emptying the gun into me. He doesn't even have to stand up - if he gets the gun and I don't finish him with the kick then he can just roll over on his back and start shooting. Once we reach that point my follow-up options are pretty bad.

I'd probably go with a sort of modified sprawl (easier to demonstrate than to explain in text) with priority on controlling the arm he is reaching with.

Best case scenario: I intercept his arm before he gets the gun and am able to kick the gun away. Then I can control him long enough to do at least stunning damage before disengaging and going for the gun.

Not as good scenario: He grabs the gun, but I am able to control his arm and keep him from aiming it at me. With top control I have a variety of options to make him drop the gun, which I then kick away before working for the finish.

Worst case scenario: He gets the gun and is able to aim and shoot it at me. If the shot isn't immediately fatal, I'm at least in close enough contact that I have a chance of regaining control of the gun and managing a disarm.

Of course, this is all theory. I've never been in this situation and I doubt that a ton of other people have been either. (Of those people who have been in a similar situation, I suspect a majority are law enforcement or military with the option to use their own firearm before the other guy reaches his.)


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Like I said, a choke is the only way to be sure. Regardless of size, weight, height, etc. everyone needs air.


Have you ever tried to grapple when your scared out of your mind and fighting for your life feet from a gun with a guy that wants to kill you?  I havent and dont think I could pull it off.  I know it can be hard to even handcuff a compliant guy when your adrenalin is dumped. Its a totally different level of a dump when your fighting fo your life vs training or competitions you may be able to pull it off  I dont think I could for me im going to KIck, kick,kick ,kick and kick again until he stops.   In that situation do what you do best there is no correct way just do something


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> yeah but i am actually quote a source.
> Assault violence offences VIC Criminal legal
> 
> now if i cause the same damage punching the guy as kicking him. In the head. And especially on the deck.i have committed a bigger crime.
> 
> you are looking at the legalities far too simply. Yes there will be circumstances where gnp is not legally defendable. But saying all gnp is not legally defendable,is not really true.
> 
> and is a big side tangent to be throwing out there.



Your legalities are different from mine obviously. I didn't say GnP wasn't legal I said controlling the attacker so that he is no danger and then bashing him isn't legal which it's not.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> Hmmm, so a knock out blow doesn't = KO?
> Or like Drop Bear have you also morphed into Super Man so you are 100% sure you can work that choke?  A few posts back in another thread you yourself said to be good at any throw you needed to be good at 20 other techniques, in case that throw didn't work.  Aren't you going to apply that same logic to this choke of yours?



A KO from a strike requires you to hit the right point at the right time on the right person. A choke simply requires you to apply it correctly, and your adversary has a few seconds to do something about it before they go to sleep. Keep in mind, we're applying this in a situation where your target is vulnerable, but even beyond that, choking someone out is the most humane way of ending a physical confrontation. The alternative is bashing them in the face until they lose consciousness, or snapping limbs until they're no longer a threat.



> Regardless of size?  Correct, but you gonna go for that choke and get all up close and personal on that 6.5ft 300 pound rhino of a bloke with a neck like a bison?



I've choked/tapped out people that size, and even larger. I've done that even when they're attempting to fight me off of them, and with striking engaged.

Hence the benefit of alive training in Bjj and MMA.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Who made such a suggestion, where?
> 
> PS: it wasn't the "street", it was some shonky back room of a gym with some passable production skills and the presentation of a supposedly believable SD situation and response.



he was wearing cargo pants. That automatically makes it the street.

if they were camouflage he gets extra credibility points.

the comment was made somewhere in there attached to a "never go to the ground because there is that guy waiting to kick you in the head.

extra silly here. Because of that gun. So regardless of how many kicks you eat. You have to control that even if it means rolling around on the ground. And if mr crawly guy has a fried. I imagine he would be going for that gun as well.


----------



## tshadowchaser

The legalities of what can be done and at what time vary  so much from place to place, nation to nation that I sometimes wonder if it isn't just best to do all the damage you can to an attacker and take your chances in court or if you should flee the scene if your not in your own home.
The op is a perfect example do you want to be there if serious injury happens to that guy on the ground and can you prove he was going for the weapon and had not stopped being aggressive? 
If you ground and pound him he can always say he stopped trying to get the weapon and became compliant but you keep pounding on him when he was unable to defend himslef


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Have you ever tried to grapple when your scared out of your mind and fighting for your life feet from a gun with a guy that wants to kill you?  I havent and dont think I could pull it off.  I know it can be hard to even handcuff a compliant guy when your adrenalin is dumped. Its a totally different level of a dump when your fighting fo your life vs training or competitions you may be able to pull it off  I dont think I could for me im going to KIck, kick,kick ,kick and kick again until he stops.   In that situation do what you do best there is no correct way just do something



Have I? No. However, people have choked out assailants when their lives are in danger, so its certainly possible to pull off a complex choke when you're in trouble.



tshadowchaser said:


> The legalities of what can be done and at what time vary  so much from place to place, nation to nation that I sometimes wonder if it isn't just best to do all the damage you can to an attacker and take your chances in court or if you should flee the scene if your not in your own home.
> The op is a perfect example do you want to be there if serious injury happens to that guy on the ground and can you prove he was going for the weapon and had not stopped being aggressive?
> If you ground and pound him he can always say he stopped trying to get the weapon and became compliant but you keep pounding on him when he was unable to defend himslef



Another reason why a choke *may* be a better option than bashing his skull in.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Your legalities are different from mine obviously. I didn't say GnP wasn't legal I said controlling the attacker so that he is no danger and then bashing him isn't legal which it's not.



that is pretty much gnp.
well good gnp anyway.

i know a few guys myself included who have pulled knives off people and then gone on a bit of a rampage.

i have never known anyone to even be charged let alone convicted.

i imagine under the circumstances it is seen as reasonable.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Have I? No. However, people have choked out assailants when their lives are in danger, so its certainly possible to pull off a complex choke when you're in trouble.
> .


People "have" done alot of things that doesnt make it a good idea


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> *he was wearing cargo pants. That automatically makes it the street.
> 
> if they were camouflage he gets extra credibility points.*
> 
> the comment was made somewhere in there attached to a "never go to the ground because there is that guy waiting to kick you in the head.
> 
> extra silly here. Because of that gun. So regardless of how many kicks you eat. You have to control that even if it means rolling around on the ground. And if mr crawly guy has a fried. I imagine he would be going for that gun as well.



 You are joking here right?



tshadowchaser said:


> The legalities of what can be done and at what time vary  so much from place to place, nation to nation that I sometimes wonder if it isn't just best to do all the damage you can to an attacker and take your chances in court or if you should flee the scene if your not in your own home.



This doesn't really work if you are police officer though!


----------



## ballen0351

tshadowchaser said:


> The legalities of what can be done and at what time vary  so much from place to place, nation to nation that I sometimes wonder if it isn't just best to do all the damage you can to an attacker and take your chances in court or if you should flee the scene if your not in your own home.
> The op is a perfect example do you want to be there if serious injury happens to that guy on the ground and can you prove he was going for the weapon and had not stopped being aggressive?
> If you ground and pound him he can always say he stopped trying to get the weapon and became compliant but you keep pounding on him when he was unable to defend himslef


I dont care about the courts better to be judged by 12 then carried by 6.  Ill save my life 1st then Ill worry about what happens next.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> People "have" done alot of things that doesnt make it a good idea



A woman triangle choked a guy trying to rape her at knife point.

Not a good idea?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> A woman triangle choked a guy trying to rape her at knife point.
> 
> Not a good idea?


1 huh well there you go


----------



## ballen0351

I knew 1 guy that jumped a fence and his tshirt got caught on the fence and he was hung to death.  Better ban tshirts cause it happened once


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> 1 huh well there you go



Well howabout the wrestler who took down, and RNC'd a burglar and then called the cops?

Not a good idea?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Well howabout the wrestler who took down, and RNC'd a burglar and then called the cops?
> 
> Not a good idea?


LOL again 1?  I know a man that beat a burglar with a pickle jar.   Like I said just because its done doesn't mean its right  but as long as you do something its better then nothing


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> LOL again 1?  I know a man that beat a burglar with a pickle jar.   Like I said just because its done doesn't mean its right  but as long as you do something its better then nothing



so what is your argument. Chokes cant be pulled off under stress?

of course they can. So if you don't think they are a good idea. You need to come up with a new reason why.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> so what is your argument. Chokes cant be pulled off under stress?
> 
> of course they can. So if you don't think they are a good idea. You need to come up with a new reason why.


Where did I say it cant work?  Ive said ANYTHING can work.  It doesnt make it correct


----------



## drop bear

And i cant fault beating someone with a pickle jar. That is a good idea.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> And i cant fault beating someone with a pickle jar. That is a good idea.


So you giving up training and going to carry a jar everywhere?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Where did I say it cant work?  Ive said ANYTHING can work.  It doesnt make it correct



"Have you ever tried to grapple when your scared out of your mind and fighting for your life feet from a gun with a guy that wants to kill you? I havent and dont think I could pull it off. I know it can be hard to even handcuff a compliant guy when your adrenalin is dumped. Its a totally different level of a dump when your fighting fo your life vs training or competitions you may be able to pull it off."

i can grapple when fighting for my life that girl could. The wrestler could. I know of other who can. And could find examples of chokes working in life or death fights.

so if you don't think chokes are a good idea street vs sport is going to be a non starter.


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> So you giving up training and going to carry a jar everywhere?






Pickled onions, now they are worth fighting *for*! Pickled eggs not so much as for pickled gherkins never ever, I think you could force feed them to an attacker and be charged with attempted murder!


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> So you giving up training and going to carry a jar everywhere?



no i am going to train jar fighting to add to my tool box.

thinking a bit like ekky yhump


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> no i am going to train jar fighting to add to my tool box.
> 
> thinking a bit like ecky thump


----------



## K-man

There is some good information on this thread and there are other ideas that could get you killed real easy. I hope the people reading this thread can differentiate.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> There is some good information on this thread and there are other ideas that could get you killed real easy. I hope the people reading this thread can differentiate.



if you are style bashing ecky thump there will be issues.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Where did I say it cant work?  Ive said ANYTHING can work.  It doesnt make it correct



Well nothing trumps the effectiveness of a shin kick to the throat followed by a heel stomp to the chest, but it's always good to have a plan B.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i can grapple when fighting for my life that girl could. The wrestler could. I know of other who can. And could find examples of chokes working in life or death fights.
> 
> so if you don't think chokes are a good idea street vs sport is going to be a non starter.


No Im saying a choke is harder to do and easier to defend esp when your scared half to death.  A kick is much easier and higher %age move and easier to repeat over and over


----------



## Transk53

K-man said:


> There is some good information on this thread and there are other ideas that could get you killed real easy. I hope the people reading this thread can differentiate.



I for can. No I am not going to try anything either!


----------



## Transk53

drop bear said:


>



Funny that you would pick the Goodies. Hope you not suggesting that all Brits are crazy and that we have giant Kittens in our gardens lol


----------



## jks9199

Folks,
Let's try real hard to keep things civil and mutually respectful, 'k?

Consider this a rather friendly reminder...


----------



## Transk53

Sorry, point taken!


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> No Im saying a choke is harder to do and easier to defend esp when your scared half to death.  A kick is much easier and higher %age move and easier to repeat over and over



the choke has a positional advantage. Because even if the choke does not knock someone out you are still controlling his body.  You don't have to rely on it working off the bat or you loose your next shot.

the kick has to work or you can't repeat it. Because he will just stand up. The only thing holding him there is that kick.

with the choke. He has to defend that and then escape from that position. There is two attacks going on.

you seem to be the only person who cant apply a choke under stress.

Ferguson guy managed it. And that was life or death. A kangaroo managed it and they have giant legs for kicking and puny arms.

i am not sure where you are getting this idea a choke is inherently low percentage. Especially the idea you cant do it under stress.


----------



## drop bear




----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> the choke has a positional advantage. Because even if the choke does not knock someone out you are still controlling his body.  You don't have to rely on it working off the bat or you loose your next shot.


No all I need to do is drop my chin and crawl to the gun.  If there was no weapon in play it wouldnt matter you have time to work it out.  


> the kick has to work or you can't repeat it. Because he will just stand up. The only thing holding him there is that kick.


It takes a second to rechamber and kick again and keep kicking and kicking.  Its not hard to knock someone out by kicking them


> with the choke. He has to defend that and then escape from that position. There is two attacks going on.


No he just needs to defend long enough to get to the gun


> you seem to be the only person who cant apply a choke under stress.


its hard to do most things under stress.  I dont know if I can or cant apply a choke in a life or death fight Ive never tried.  I have punch, struck, and shot someone however in a life or death fight so I know I can do that.  I know when the Adrenalinis pumping simple tasks like putting on handcuffs is alot harder then normal.


> Ferguson guy managed it. And that was life or death.


what ferguson guy?  Mike Brown was shot


> A kangaroo managed it and they have giant legs for kicking and puny arms.


seriously?  thats relevant how?


> i am not sure where you are getting this idea a choke is inherently low percentage. Especially the idea you cant do it under stress.


Ummm because Ive had people try it on me in real life and its pretty darn easy to defend it.  Ummm because under stress (real stress) everything is hard to do.  I also never said you cant to it I said its harder.  Repeated kicking is much easier and more effective then getting on the ground with a guy scrambling for a gun.  
Not to mention the plus 1 rule.  If you find 1 weapon there is 2.  If you find 2 there is 3  if you find 3 there is 4 etc etc etc. The best plan to to quickly and effectively incapacitate the suspect.  Even a choke takes 10+ seconds.  I exploded a mans heart no blood flow to the brain he still was able to walk away and move for several seconds before he fell. Do you know how many shots you can fire in 5 seconds?  ALOT


In reality you will never find yourself in the situation in the OP video so it really doesnt matter.  Do a kangaroo choke I dont care


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


>


Your an idiot and will be going on ignore so the rest of us can talk about humans


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> No all I need to do is drop my chin and crawl to the gun.  If there was no weapon in play it wouldnt matter you have time to work it out.
> 
> It takes a second to rechamber and kick again and keep kicking and kicking.  Its not hard to knock someone out by kicking them
> 
> No he just needs to defend long enough to get to the gun
> 
> its hard to do most things under stress.  I dont know if I can or cant apply a choke in a life or death fight Ive never tried.  I have punch, struck, and shot someone however in a life or death fight so I know I can do that.  I know when the Adrenalinis pumping simple tasks like putting on handcuffs is alot harder then normal.
> 
> what ferguson guy?  Mike Brown was shot
> 
> seriously?  thats relevant how?
> 
> Ummm because Ive had people try it on me in real life and its pretty darn easy to defend it.  Ummm because under stress (real stress) everything is hard to do.  I also never said you cant to it I said its harder.  Repeated kicking is much easier and more effective then getting on the ground with a guy scrambling for a gun.
> Not to mention the plus 1 rule.  If you find 1 weapon there is 2.  If you find 2 there is 3  if you find 3 there is 4 etc etc etc. The best plan to to quickly and effectively incapacitate the suspect.  Even a choke takes 10+ seconds.  I exploded a mans heart no blood flow to the brain he still was able to walk away and move for several seconds before he fell. Do you know how many shots you can fire in 5 seconds?  ALOT
> 
> 
> In reality you will never find yourself in the situation in the OP video so it really doesnt matter.  Do a kangaroo choke I dont care




lol. With the kick i just drop my chin and crawl towards the gun.

it is not hard to knock someone out with a choke.

the choke works in real life under stress. Not once or twice. A lot of times. 

so you say it is easier and it seem now you have.
Doesn't work under stress. Disproved.
Doesn't work on you. Too small a sample. You may be magically unchokable. That is not the norm.

i have seen a guy who was kicked in the head who was able to walk around fine after.

the chokes i mentions put you in between the guy and the gun. A rear naked give you the chance to drag the person backwards.

all high percentage.

i have done that kangaroo choke a lot.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Your an idiot and will be going on ignore so the rest of us can talk about humans



lol. Real friendly.






real police effectively using chokes.


----------



## K-man

There is a huge problem here. People who use this sort of training in their daily work, people who teach this type of RBMA, students who learn it and the OP video produced by an ex military man instrumental in setting up and teaching this sort of training to military, police and civilians all over the world ( Martial Arts Biography - Tim Larkin ) vs a couple of sport based grapplers who reckon they know everything. Go figure! As I said, if your life depended on it I know who's advice I'd be taking.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> There is a huge problem here. People who use this sort of training in their daily work, people who teach this type of RBMA, students who learn it and the OP video produced by an ex military man instrumental in setting up and teaching this sort of training to military, police and civilians all over the world ( Martial Arts Biography - Tim Larkin ) vs a couple of sport based grapplers who reckon they know everything. Go figure! As I said, if your life depended on it I know who's advice I'd be taking.



Sgt Paul Cale Camo ain t a qualification - Identifying authentic military combatives - Blitz Martial Arts Magazine

i would be taking Paul cales advice.

did you know the seals have a database so you can verify who has been a seal and who hasn't?


----------



## drop bear

And k man you could actually fly to Townsville and train with Paul came for about the same as it costs to buy a Tim larkin dvd.

if you want i will have my coach introduce you.


----------



## drop bear

Videos DVDs 8211 Target Focus Training

they are very expensive. Especially for kick them in the head.


----------



## Steve

drop bear said:


> Sgt Paul Cale Camo ain t a qualification - Identifying authentic military combatives - Blitz Martial Arts Magazine
> 
> i would be taking Paul cales advice.
> 
> did you know the seals have a database so you can verify who has been a seal and who hasn't?


agreed.   It seems that we are down to silly attacks on your credibility.  


K-man said:


> There is a huge problem here. People who use this sort of training in their daily work, people who teach this type of RBMA, students who learn it and the OP video produced by an ex military man instrumental in setting up and teaching this sort of training to military, police and civilians all over the world ( Martial Arts Biography - Tim Larkin ) vs a couple of sport based grapplers who reckon they know everything. Go figure! As I said, if your life depended on it I know who's advice I'd be taking.


like it or not, but based on what we know about you and about drop bear, drop bear has quite a bit more experience with real world violence than you... Sport guy or not.  Why can't you guys give him some credit?  He makes a lot of sense if you just let your egos take a little break.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Sgt Paul Cale Camo ain t a qualification - Identifying authentic military combatives - Blitz Martial Arts Magazine
> 
> i would be taking Paul cales advice.
> 
> did you know the seals have a database so you can verify who has been a seal and who hasn't?


What are you on about? Are you saying Tim Larkin's bio is wrong?


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Videos DVDs 8211 Target Focus Training
> 
> they are very expensive. Especially for kick them in the head.


I have some of his videos. What is your point?


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> What are you on about? Are you saying Tim Larkin's bio is wrong?



we dint style bash and we don't fraud bust here.

so i am sure he is a lovely bloke.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> I have some of his videos. What is your point?



i could get you training with legitimate bad asses for about the same money.


----------



## Cirdan

ballen0351 said:


> Your an idiot and will be going on ignore so the rest of us can talk about humans



Just went trough the last few pages in this thread  am going to do the same, past a certain point some things are just not worth reading even as a curiosity.


----------



## Zero

Steve said:


> agreed.   It seems that we are down to silly attacks on your credibility.
> like it or not, but based on what we know about you and about drop bear, drop bear has quite a bit more experience with real world violence than you... Sport guy or not.  Why can't you guys give him some credit?  He makes a lot of sense if you just let your egos take a little break.



I know nothing about K-Man's experience, sport, street or otherwise but I am failing to see the experience Drop bear has coming through as sensible comments on certain points.

I am not sure how much tournament or real life experience Drop bear has.
Comments like: "tournament fighting trains you to end fights quick and is equally applicable to the streets" (ok I am paraphrasing there) don't stack up to me.  When you actually execute techniques in competition you can be trying to end things as quick as possible with a particular attempted TKO/KO but sport fighting in general, including UFC has little to do with ending things quickly in one split moment.  You don't have some guy absolutely committed to biting off your nose or putting a blade in you and to hell with all consequences.

You have two opponents (and not other randoms thrown in) squared off against each other and that very often for some time test each other and feel each other out or look to wear the other down a bit.  You far less often have an opponent commit fully in an all out attack off the bat.  Further, even if a competitor is winning, and has made it to the third round, they often deliberately take the heel off the gas and run down the clock to win on points, even in UFC and other MMA.  They don't want to risk that one in a hundred KO putting them away when they are up on points and have the fight in the bag.  Any sport where you do not absolutely need to KO/TKO opponent to win the fight will be like that.

On many levels it does little to prepare you for a real world attack.

So when Drop bear says things like this I do question his experience or the sense in some of the things he says or his ability to take sport experience and apply it to SD.

Hey, a lot of what he says I agree with but some I just can't relate to that much.  Drop Bears comments in the whole seem to me to be an intermediate level sport bjj perspective applied to SD.  That's not a put down at all, just how I see it (I could be completely wrong).

And I must have missed this real world violence experience of Drop Bear, and sorry if did, but all I saw were some references to bouncing and a comment about taking a blade off some guy and "going on a rampage".


----------



## Hanzou

I find it funny that people are questioning the validity of "sport grappling techniques" in a self defense situation, when the highly respected RBSD guy in the video did a standing neck crank which comes straight out of catch wrestling.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> I find it funny that people are questioning the validity of "sport grappling techniques" in a self defense situation, when the highly respected RBSD guy in the video did a standing neck crank which comes straight out of catch wrestling.



Who has questioned the validity of "sport grappling techniques"? 
I certainly haven't.
People have stated they may have a preferential go-to in that situation they would rate over a sprawl or grappling in general.

Highly respected by who?
Where are you getting these statements from Hanzou?


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> Who has questioned the validity of "sport grappling techniques"?
> I certainly haven't.
> People have stated they may have a preferential go-to in that situation they would rate over a sprawl or grappling in general.
> 
> Highly respected by who?
> Where are you getting these statements from Hanzou?



That would be Kman. Perhaps I should have quoted him, but the point stands.

As I stated earlier, grappling is implied as being viable in that situation. With that being the case, there are plenty of better grappling techniques than those shown in the vid. Especially if the goal is to "destroy" your assailant.

The technique for the ring vs the street argument is simply nonsense. If I can choke you out in the ring or the training hall, I can choke you in the street as well. And frankly, I can probably choke you out faster because you don't know its entry, stop it when its applied, or relax enough to give yourself more time to react.


----------



## K-man

We tried it out at training tonight. Can I say, in the scenario where the bad guy has his hand on the weapon, as shown in the OP video, it was almost impossible to stop him using it. Factors we varied were where the bad guy had to reach further for the gun and the distance you had to cover. The only chance you had was when you were very close. Going for any sort of grapple failed dismally. Kick to the head was easily evaded by either shrugging the shoulder or dropping the head below the shoulder. 

So what worked. Well kicking into the 'V' between the head and shoulder was the best. It ended up with a knee drop or knee to the head on some of those occasions. On some occasions the bad guy rolled onto his back, more often than not to take the shot. It was possible to step on the hand as he grabbed the gun but the follow up was difficult. It was also possible to dive for the gun but you ended up in a wrestle. You could not kick the gun away, that was definitely not an option.

Since tonight was our last session before the Christmas break we won't be playing with it again until next year but we will revisit it. 

But, carry on guys, I'm interested in hearing how you will stop the bad guy from shooting you.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> That would be Kman. Perhaps I should have quoted him, but the point stands.
> 
> As I stated earlier, grappling is implied as being viable in that situation. With that being the case, there are plenty of better grappling techniques than those shown in the vid. Especially if the goal is to "destroy" your assailant.
> 
> The technique for the ring vs the street argument is simply nonsense. If I can choke you out in the ring or the training hall, I can choke you in the street as well. And frankly, I can probably choke you out faster because you don't know its entry, stop it when its applied, or relax enough to give yourself more time to react.



What technique for ring vs street argument?   I must be only half awake on this thread  : ) 
Obviously the techs themselves, sometimes albeit with modification, are the one and the same.  I think the only point being made, by the likes of Ballen, is that trying to do something in "real life", ie when you have just been attacked yourself can often be harder to apply and that to the extent possible things should be kept simple.  Unlike in sparring or the ring you don't normally have the luxury in a SD situation where your techs go wrong, also, you don't have the luxury of using anything that isn't going to stop things quick.  You need to be able to transition from one quick take-out to the next in case your first doesn't work or is negated by your assailants or you need to face multiple opponents or your aggressor may be seeking to use another weapon they have on them. 
Cue to scene:
There's the gun on the ground and you go for the sprawl and pound or it moves to an upright position and you go for the neck crank but have not immobilised both arms and, oops, assailant sticks that other blade into your guts as you choking him out.  Nice.

Sometimes a strike will be on, sometimes the submission will be the option or sometimes it could be both.  If you have the strength and manage to obtain control, such as from rear choke, you may want to momentarily use an attacker as a shield or ram against other attackers, and so a choke would be the better solution rather than just striking him to the ground.  You just need a toolkit you can use without thinking in the face with whatever is coming at you.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> What technique for ring vs street argument?   I must be only half awake on this thread  : )
> Obviously the techs themselves, sometimes albeit with modification, are the one and the same.  I think the only point being made, by the likes of Ballen, is that trying to do something in "real life", ie when you have just been attacked yourself can often be harder to apply and that to the extent possible things should be kept simple.  Unlike in sparring or the ring you don't normally have the luxury in a SD situation where your techs go wrong, also, you don't have the luxury of using anything that isn't going to stop things quick.  You need to be able to transition from one quick take-out to the next in case your first doesn't work or is negated by your assailants or you need to face multiple opponents or your aggressor may be seeking to use another weapon they have on them.
> Cue to scene:
> There's the gun on the ground and you go for the sprawl and pound or it moves to an upright position and you go for the neck crank but have not immobilised both arms and, oops, assailant sticks that other blade into your guts as you choking him out.  Nice.
> 
> Sometimes a strike will be on, sometimes the submission will be the option or sometimes it could be both.  If you have the strength and manage to obtain control, such as from rear choke, you may want to momentarily use an attacker as a shield or ram against other attackers, and so a choke would be the better solution rather than just striking him to the ground.  You just need a toolkit you can use without thinking in the face with whatever is coming at you.



Well its implied throughout this thread zero. The constant mentioning of sport is used as a means to demean the street knowledge of martial artists who participate in arts that also have a competitive side. 

I think dealing in hypotheticals is pretty pointless. We won't know what to do in a situation until we are actually in that situation. We've already established that people have utilized grappling in SD situations. Even Mr. Larkin is using grappling to finish off his adversary in his own video.

Let's' discuss your point about what happens when your first technique fails. This is actually dealt with when you train Bjj, MMA, or other grappling arts. When you roll in a grappling art, you learn how to transition from one move to another. Bjj is famous for fluid and rapid transitions on the ground from one movement to the next. If your RNC fails, you can immediately move to a different choke, or an armlock. From Guard if your kimura attempt fails for example, you can immediately move to a guillotine choke.

Further, you're constantly training against equally skilled, or superior grapplers. Some of those grapplers are bigger and stronger than you are, and are fully resisting your attempt to submit them, sometimes with kicks and punches. 

So when you spend upwards of 50% of your training time doing that what do you think happens when you attempt the same stuff against someone who doesn't know how to grapple?

Its a walk in the park.


----------



## Zero

K-man said:


> We tried it out at training tonight. Can I say, in the scenario where the bad guy has his hand on the weapon, as shown in the OP video, it was almost impossible to stop him using it. Factors we varied were where the bad guy had to reach further for the gun and the distance you had to cover. The only chance you had was when you were very close. Going for any sort of grapple failed dismally. Kick to the head was easily evaded by either shrugging the shoulder or dropping the head below the shoulder.
> 
> So what worked. Well kicking into the 'V' between the head and shoulder was the best. It ended up with a knee drop or knee to the head on some of those occasions. On some occasions the bad guy rolled onto his back, more often than not to take the shot. It was possible to step on the hand as he grabbed the gun but the follow up was difficult. It was also possible to dive for the gun but you ended up in a wrestle. You could not kick the gun away, that was definitely not an option.
> 
> Since tonight was our last session before the Christmas break we won't be playing with it again until next year but we will revisit it.
> 
> But, carry on guys, I'm interested in hearing how you will stop the bad guy from shooting you.



Excellent, thanks for taking time to role-play that at training.  I'm not going to be in the club til after New Years so much obliged.  Although I still think I could put my foot through his head...  maybe not...

If you could try this again when you re-group but have the gun on the floor and have the perp with another weapon, ie blade on him that would be informative.  I guess the grapple would still fail and probably worse, while your V-kick and knee drop should keep you covered from any hidden blade attack.

I think the kick to V could have a greater risk of being trapped and worked either to be smothered or into a take-down though?  That would be my concern as you are kicking into the body.  Much like you can take a bruised or broken rib with a torso shot but still trap the leg under the arm and sweep the other leg.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Well its implied throughout this thread zero. The constant mentioning of sport is used as a means to demean the street knowledge of martial artists who participate in arts that also have a competitive side.
> 
> I think dealing in hypotheticals is pretty pointless. We won't know what to do in a situation until we are actually in that situation. We've already established that people have utilized grappling in SD situations. Even Mr. Larkin is using grappling to finish off his adversary in his own video.
> 
> Let's' discuss your point about what happens when your first technique fails. This is actually dealt with when you train Bjj, MMA, or other grappling arts. When you roll in a grappling art, you learn how to transition from one move to another. Bjj is famous for fluid and rapid transitions on the ground from one movement to the next. If your RNC fails, you can immediately move to a different choke, or an armlock. From Guard if your kimura attempt fails for example, you can immediately move to a guillotine choke.
> 
> Further, you're constantly training against equally skilled, or superior grapplers. Some of those grapplers are bigger and stronger than you are, and are fully resisting your attempt to submit them, sometimes with kicks and punches.
> 
> So when you spend upwards of 50% of your training time doing that what do you think happens when you attempt the same stuff against someone who doesn't know how to grapple?
> 
> Its a walk in the park.




All good.

The same equally applies to strike fighters, you constantly roll from one technique or set of combos to the next, you re-adjust, change distance, angles etc, etc.  So I would think both are the same in that respect and most everything else in your post.

My only issue is, you seem to be coming at this on the presumption that whoever you are up against on the street, in the SD scenario doesn't know how to grapple or does not have the ability to at least negate some grappling techniques.

Then, all of a sudden, it's no longer your "walk in the park"   : 0


----------



## Zero

As a complete on-point and non-derailer, may all your recoveries go as well as this slick dude (what a loser!! hehe)(be sure to watch the short vid):

Moment gym-goer falls flat while ogling woman... before doing push-ups to hide his blushes - World - News - London Evening Standard


----------



## Zero

I knew we could get K-Man back in this thread and away from the pop-corn! hehe!


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> My only issue is, you seem to be coming at this on the presumption that whoever you are up against on the street, in the SD scenario doesn't know how to grapple or does not have the ability to at least negate some grappling techniques.
> 
> Then, all of a sudden, it's no longer your "walk in the park"   : 0



Well aren't strikers coming from the presumption that they're up against someone in a SD situation who doesn't know how to strike?

Bjj (and MMA) constantly absorb other styles to improve itself. Leg locks being taught in Bjj is just one such example. How many traditional MA styles are absorbing more modern striking techniques from Boxing or MT Kickboxing?


----------



## Steve

Zero said:


> Who has questioned the validity of "sport grappling techniques"?
> I certainly haven't.
> People have stated they may have a preferential go-to in that situation they would rate over a sprawl or grappling in general.
> 
> Highly respected by who?
> Where are you getting these statements from Hanzou?


Zero, I don't understand how you can say this when you are actively diminishing the usefulness of the sport guy's experience two posts earlier.   Granted the sports guy in question alleges to have been involved in security and bouncing for many years, as well.   But you can't have it both ways.   You either think sport guys have vaue or you don't.  And honestly, either way you're entitled to your opinion.   The inconsistency is what I wish would stop.


----------



## Zero

Steve said:


> Zero, I don't understand how you can say this when you are actively diminishing the usefulness of the sport guy's experience two posts earlier.   Granted the sports guy in question alleges to have been involved in security and bouncing for many years, as well.   But you can't have it both ways.   You either think sport guys have vaue or you don't.  And honestly, either way you're entitled to your opinion.   The inconsistency is what I wish would stop.



Hmmm. Maybe I have not been expressing myself well enough or have not come across as consistent.  In any event I am a bit confused by your post.  I am a sports guy also, having competed for years and years, first judo, then TKD, then karate and kickboxing and for the last few years some MMA alongside karate. 

Thankfully I have also had some great training and input from some who I see as experienced and seasoned SD people, one who has had to put his views to the test as a LEO both on the street and in the cells.  Also, fortunately (from the perspective of having survived with only small injury) (or unfortunately, having not been able to avoid the situation) I have been in actual, non-sport confrontations and one pretty hairy SD situation, so I have some real hand experience (far less than many but also far more than surprisingly a lot in the MA world) to draw on and use as my own (self-biased) BS meter - not saying there is BS in this thread. Having used things in the real world out of the ring with success I am therefore inclined, while trying to stay open minded, to go to my tools that have worked under pressure (on the basis of not just standing there hopefully like a rabbit in the head lights if that does not initially work).

My view is that the training sports guys have gives them superb skills, if they have put the effort (both physical and mental) in, applicable both for ring and street.  My experience, from comments on this site, from the news and from seeing the actions of some peers from some of the clubs I have been a member of (both sport and traditional I would admit) is that a lot of MAsts will jump into a situation applying the mind set of the sport or style they train in, and that can get them in a world of pain in real life. A bad derail into another thread but I think it is on point: take the recent thread re the combative sport bjj add that has been discussed.  I have nothing against the add itself (from a production value) or the skills employed.  But the issue is, as a sports outlook you have already got yourself in a situation you should not be in - and on a two (or more) on one situation, there is no certainty you are coming out of that.  You didn't check the surrounding environment (a dark, poorly lighted car park at night), you were in a distracted (or not focused/aware) state, you did not assess the vehicle, the guy asking for help or do a look-see or peripheral/360 check when the guy was distracting you and asking for help. You were unaware of the assailant approaching from behind. Your follow up on the phone afterwards was dubious.  You had to fall back on your good skills because you had no SD ability.  = Sport outlook.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Well aren't strikers coming from the presumption that they're up against someone in a SD situation who doesn't know how to strike?
> 
> Bjj (and MMA) constantly absorb other styles to improve itself. Leg locks being taught in Bjj is just one such example. How many traditional MA styles are absorbing more modern striking techniques from Boxing or MT Kickboxing?



I never saw this as a strikers or traditional MA in SD vs grapplers/MMAers in SD scenario (and I think a lot of the training and fighters Tez3 works with is in MMA context).
I see myself as a freestyle fighter myself, my first art was judo but my core and key style, karate/kickboxing, is striking. I have put layers of wrestling and grappling and jujitsu onto that also.

To your question, no (or certainly not myself).  It would be foolish for a core striker or core grappler to assume their opponent, even on the street or a mugger does not have the same skill set, or even greater ability.  You don't (well sometimes you do, I have) under estimate your opponent in the ring (or the chance he will get lucky) and you don't underestimate the guy in your face on the subway - that gets you killed.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> I never saw this as a strikers or traditional MA in SD vs grapplers/MMAers in SD scenario (and I think a lot of the training and fighters Tez3 works with is in MMA context).
> I see myself as a freestyle fighter myself, my first art was judo but my core and key style, karate/kickboxing, is striking. I have put layers of wrestling and grappling and jujitsu onto that also.



Unfortunately it sort of veered that way because of the reaction some people had towards applying grappling or "sport grappling" to a SD situation. I'm also a freestyle fighter of sorts. Despite being able to punch and kick, if my goal was to take someone out of a fight completely, I would still go for a choke, or a break over a punch or a kick.



> To your question, no (or certainly not myself).  It would be foolish for a core striker or core grappler to assume their opponent, even on the street or a mugger does not have the same skill set, or even greater ability.  You don't (well sometimes you do, I have) under estimate your opponent in the ring (or the chance he will get lucky) and you don't underestimate the guy in your face on the subway - that gets you killed.



It's not a matter of underestimation. It's a matter of trusting in your skills to save your life. If you trust your skills, then you almost have to believe that you're better at kicking and punching than your assailant. There's no way around it. If you're not better at "fighting" than your assailant, you're in a lot of trouble.


----------



## Tez3

Most of my students spend a good deal of their lives fighting one way or another. They spend a fair amount of time fighting with others on what could be called the street as it often spills out there, mostly it's in pubs and nightclubs though they are targeted most often they do also start fights. Their COs are hoping that competing in MMA stops them fighting in their leisure time but they also know that isn't going to happen, they hope it just makes them better fighters so they don't get bashed up and unable to work.
There is aggression, instinctive fighting, awareness and a whole lot of other training for fights instilled into them so it's not surprising they fight so much, that and so many of the local youths wanting to measure themselves up with them. I don't think my students are the most typical MMA students to measure others by lol.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Hmmm. Maybe I have not been expressing myself well enough or have not come across as consistent.  In any event I am a bit confused by your post.  I am a sports guy also, having competed for years and years, first judo, then TKD, then karate and kickboxing and for the last few years some MMA alongside karate.
> 
> Thankfully I have also had some great training and input from some who I see as experienced and seasoned SD people, one who has had to put his views to the test as a LEO both on the street and in the cells.  Also, fortunately (from the perspective of having survived with only small injury) (or unfortunately, having not been able to avoid the situation) I have been in actual, non-sport confrontations and one pretty hairy SD situation, so I have some real hand experience (far less than many but also far more than surprisingly a lot in the MA world) to draw on and use as my own (self-biased) BS meter - not saying there is BS in this thread. Having used things in the real world out of the ring with success I am therefore inclined, while trying to stay open minded, to go to my tools that have worked under pressure (on the basis of not just standing there hopefully like a rabbit in the head lights if that does not initially work).
> 
> My view is that the training sports guys have gives them superb skills, if they have put the effort (both physical and mental) in, applicable both for ring and street.  My experience, from comments on this site, from the news and from seeing the actions of some peers from some of the clubs I have been a member of (both sport and traditional I would admit) is that a lot of MAsts will jump into a situation applying the mind set of the sport or style they train in, and that can get them in a world of pain in real life. A bad derail into another thread but I think it is on point: take the recent thread re the combative sport bjj add that has been discussed.  I have nothing against the add itself (from a production value) or the skills employed.  But the issue is, as a sports outlook you have already got yourself in a situation you should not be in - and on a two (or more) on one situation, there is no certainty you are coming out of that.  You didn't check the surrounding environment (a dark, poorly lighted car park at night), you were in a distracted (or not focused/aware) state, you did not assess the vehicle, the guy asking for help or do a look-see or peripheral/360 check when the guy was distracting you and asking for help. You were unaware of the assailant approaching from behind. Your follow up on the phone afterwards was dubious.  You had to fall back on your good skills because you had no SD ability.  = Sport outlook.



yeah but we were not really discussing those aspects. 

there was a misconception that in a sd you are trying to end the fight quickly. And in a comp you are not.

and from there we have a whole bunch of levels where that concept is wrong.

a fight rarely goes the distance because someone is stalling or applying some sort of slow burn fighting style. It goes the distance because the other guy is a hard nut and wont let you finish it.

happens in street fights too by the way.

now where you might slow down is where you are trying to deal with the situation from a bit of safety. This is the same street and sport.

now here is the sport theory i am specifically applying.

position before submission. That in this fight you are working towards a position where you can deliver fight ending moves. And not trying to finish with your first shot. And if that first shot doesn't work firing it again and again hoping for some sort of different result.


----------



## drop bear

The "sport" issue would be taking that sprawl north south position and going for some sort of anaconda choke or similar where you would wind up in a vulnerable position.

even if it works in competition.

it is nuanced guys.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> There is aggression, instinctive fighting, awareness and a whole lot of other training for fights instilled into them so it's not surprising they fight so much, that and so many of the local youths wanting to measure themselves up with them.



Been going on for years!


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Well aren't strikers coming from the presumption that they're up against someone in a SD situation who doesn't know how to strike?


Statistically you are more likely to be attacked by someone who doesn't really know what they are doing than you are a professional fighter or experienced martial artist, and the more you train the less likely that they will be more skillful or experienced than you,  but you can't assume that they don't. Never underestimate your opponent and always remember the golden rule of martial arts - no matter how good you are there is ALWAYS somebody better (whether it be altogether or just at that moment).


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> yeah but we were not really discussing those aspects.
> 
> *there was a misconception that in a sd you are trying to end the fight quickly*. And in a comp you are not.
> 
> and from there we have a whole bunch of levels where that concept is wrong.
> 
> a fight rarely goes the distance because someone is stalling or applying some sort of slow burn fighting style. It goes the distance because the other guy is a hard nut and wont let you finish it.
> 
> happens in street fights too by the way.
> 
> now where you might slow down is where you are trying to deal with the situation from a bit of safety. This is the same street and sport.
> 
> now here is the sport theory i am specifically applying.
> 
> position before submission. That in this fight you are working towards a position where you can deliver fight ending moves. And not trying to finish with your first shot. And if that first shot doesn't work firing it again and again hoping for some sort of different result.




why would you want to prolong a 'SD' fight? surely not because you were enjoying it!


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> why would you want to prolong a 'SD' fight? surely not because you were enjoying it!



Depends on the situation and what the perp had done. The animal inside can dictate over common sense. Right or wrong, pathetic or not, some perps just don't let it go.


----------



## ballen0351

Transk53 said:


> Depends on the situation and what the perp had done. The animal inside can dictate over common sense. Right or wrong, pathetic or not, some perps just don't let it go.


Continued beating when the threat is gone isn't self defense it's a criminal act.


----------



## K-man

Zero said:


> Excellent, thanks for taking time to role-play that at training.  I'm not going to be in the club til after New Years so much obliged.  Although I still think I could put my foot through his head...  maybe not...
> 
> If you could try this again when you re-group but have the gun on the floor and have the perp with another weapon, ie blade on him that would be informative.  I guess the grapple would still fail and probably worse, while your V-kick and knee drop should keep you covered from any hidden blade attack.
> 
> I think the kick to V could have a greater risk of being trapped and worked either to be smothered or into a take-down though?  That would be my concern as you are kicking into the body.  Much like you can take a bruised or broken rib with a torso shot but still trap the leg under the arm and sweep the other leg.


To be a little more specific about what happened. We were in the position shown in the video. A right foot kick sailed straight past, not even an option from that angle. It had to be a left foot kick and to be honest if you took the time to pull your leg back it was too late, bad guy had the gun and rolled away. So you had to come straight in. If the guy reached for the gun with his left hand, even the left leg won't work. 

What we found with moving in where the gun was a fraction further away, was we ended up pushing with a dropping knee so it was in no way a finishing technique. 

We did try the knife. Totally different perspective because you don't have to enter, you can leave. If you do enter bad guy can't roll away and damage you as easily so you can work on disabling him with multiple strikes. Grappling may well have been an option but we didn't explore that with the knife. 

If it did anything it showed that a seemingly simple drill is anything but simple. Once you change distances and angles the scenario changes totally.


----------



## Dirty Dog

K-man said:


> To be a little more specific about what happened. We were in the position shown in the video. A right foot kick sailed straight past, not even an option from that angle. It had to be a left foot kick and to be honest if you took the time to pull your leg back it was too late, bad guy had the gun and rolled away. So you had to come straight in. If the guy reached for the gun with his left hand, even the left leg won't work.
> 
> What we found with moving in where the gun was a fraction further away, was we ended up pushing with a dropping knee so it was in no way a finishing technique.
> 
> We did try the knife. Totally different perspective because you don't have to enter, you can leave. If you do enter bad guy can't roll away and damage you as easily so you can work on disabling him with multiple strikes. Grappling may well have been an option but we didn't explore that with the knife.
> 
> If it did anything it showed that a seemingly simple drill is anything but simple. Once you change distances and angles the scenario changes totally.



Are you implying that _details _*matter*?????
Heresy!


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> Depends on the situation and what the perp had done. The animal inside can dictate over common sense. Right or wrong, pathetic or not, some perps just don't let it go.



Well, as Ballen has said if you continue to beat someone up after they are no longer a danger you are then committing an offence and it's no longer self defence. If the 'perp' as you say won't let go you aren't prolonging the fight, it is just continuing. In a self defence situation you really do need to keep as short as possible, if you make last out becaue you are over confident or being cocky then that is dangerous because you know the saying about pride coming before a fall.


----------



## K-man

Dirty Dog said:


> Are you implying that _details _*matter*?????
> Heresy!


Not at all. If you keep everything vague people can take what ever they want and run in opposite directions.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> We tried it out at training tonight. Can I say, in the scenario where the bad guy has his hand on the weapon, as shown in the OP video, it was almost impossible to stop him using it. Factors we varied were where the bad guy had to reach further for the gun and the distance you had to cover. The only chance you had was when you were very close. Going for any sort of grapple failed dismally. Kick to the head was easily evaded by either shrugging the shoulder or dropping the head below the shoulder.
> 
> So what worked. Well kicking into the 'V' between the head and shoulder was the best. It ended up with a knee drop or knee to the head on some of those occasions. On some occasions the bad guy rolled onto his back, more often than not to take the shot. It was possible to step on the hand as he grabbed the gun but the follow up was difficult. It was also possible to dive for the gun but you ended up in a wrestle. You could not kick the gun away, that was definitely not an option.
> 
> Since tonight was our last session before the Christmas break we won't be playing with it again until next year but we will revisit it.
> 
> But, carry on guys, I'm interested in hearing how you will stop the bad guy from shooting you.



Thanks for trying out the scenario. As I said, I doubt very many people have ever been in that sort of situation, so without trying it out it's all pretty theoretical.

Couple of questions:

Leading off with a kick (to whatever target) seems to depend on doing a fair amount of damage on the first try, which is hard to safely simulate in controlled sparring/scenario training. Did you have something like a RedMan suit or were you just pulling the kick and estimating the impact?

In what way(s) did the grapple attempts fail? Was the good guy unable to reach the bad guy in time? Was the good guy able to reach the bad guy but unable to control the gun arm? What sort of grapple was being attempted?


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> Thanks for trying out the scenario. As I said, I doubt very many people have ever been in that sort of situation, so without trying it out it's all pretty theoretical.
> 
> Couple of questions:
> 
> Leading off with a kick (to whatever target) seems to depend on doing a fair amount of damage on the first try, which is hard to safely simulate in controlled sparring/scenario training. Did you have something like a RedMan suit or were you just pulling the kick and estimating the impact?
> 
> In what way(s) did the grapple attempts fail? Was the good guy unable to reach the bad guy in time? WAs the good guy able to reach the bad guy but unable to control the gun arm? What sort of grapple was being attempted?


Didn't use any protection but to be honest, there wasn't time to get a decent kick in. Bad guy had the gun and was rolling away. That's why we ended up dropping the knee. Same with the grappling. By the time you grabbed anything he had the gun and it was a case then of controlling the weapon arm.

As I said earlier, if the weapon is slightly further away many options come into play including sprawling. 

With hindsight, I don't think it was a particularly good video to produce for SD purposes but Tony probably never thought a group of guys like us would pick it to pieces.


----------



## Transk53

ballen0351 said:


> Continued beating when the threat is gone isn't self defense it's a criminal act.



At point did I mention the threat being gone? You misunderstood by what I mean "don't let it go"  I also clearly stated "depends on the situation" There was no inference when it comes to your reply.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Didn't use any protection but to be honest, there wasn't time to get a decent kick in. Bad guy had the gun and was rolling away. That's why we ended up dropping the knee. Same with the grappling. By the time you grabbed anything he had the gun and it was a case then of controlling the weapon arm.
> 
> As I said earlier, if the weapon is slightly further away many options come into play including sprawling.
> 
> With hindsight, I don't think it was a particularly good video to produce for SD purposes but Tony probably never thought a group of guys like us would pick it to pieces.



Yeah, with the scenario as shown with the bad guy practically with his hand on the gun it gets real hard to do much of anything effective in time. At that range getting hold of the weapon arm and trying to control it seems like it might be the best you could hope for. When you said that grapple attempts failed, did you just mean they failed to stop the bad guy from reaching the gun or that there was no luck in controlling the weapon arm?

You mentioned varying the distance to the gun - how far away did it have to be before the situation got more manageable?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Transk53 said:


> At point did I mention the threat being gone? You misunderstood by what I mean "don't let it go"  I also clearly stated "depends on the situation" There was no inference when it comes to your reply.



OK... so, can you describe circumstances under which a person might NOT try to end a self defense situation as rapidly as possible?


----------



## ballen0351

Transk53 said:


> At point did I mention the threat being gone? You misunderstood by what I mean "don't let it go"  I also clearly stated "depends on the situation" There was no inference when it comes to your reply.


Apparently I wasnt the only one that misunderstood. As DD asked can you explain what you meant please


----------



## ballen0351

K-man said:


> Didn't use any protection but to be honest, there wasn't time to get a decent kick in. Bad guy had the gun and was rolling away. That's why we ended up dropping the knee. Same with the grappling. By the time you grabbed anything he had the gun and it was a case then of controlling the weapon arm.
> 
> As I said earlier, if the weapon is slightly further away many options come into play including sprawling.
> 
> With hindsight, I don't think it was a particularly good video to produce for SD purposes but Tony probably never thought a group of guys like us would pick it to pieces.


I would assume if you had already knocked the guy down and removed the gun from his hand you would have the upper hand to continue the attack.  You would be closing distance as he was falling down and attacking before he was able to get his wits about him to find the gun.


----------



## Dirty Dog

ballen0351 said:


> I would assume if you had already knocked the guy down and removed the gun from his hand you would have the upper hand to continue the attack.  You would be closing distance as he was falling down and attacking before he was able to get his wits about him to find the gun.



This is a good point. The scenario starts "mid stream" (cue bathroom joke...), which takes a bit of the "reality" out of RBSD...
Maybe start with "what could I do to a gun-wielding attacker that would result in their ending up on hands and knees with the gun right... THERE... and then play it out.


----------



## K-man

ballen0351 said:


> I would assume if you had already knocked the guy down and removed the gun from his hand you would have the upper hand to continue the attack.  You would be closing distance as he was falling down and attacking before he was able to get his wits about him to find the gun.


We were talking about how the situation came about but apart from the guy slipping and dropping the weapon. 

What was certain though, and was pointed out by an ex-cop, was your assessment where you suggested you would use your own gun. That was the only irrefutable solution.


----------



## Transk53

Dirty Dog said:


> OK... so, can you describe circumstances under which a person might NOT try to end a self defense situation as rapidly as possible?



Simply put, if you are facing someone down intent on fighting you, you turn it around. You get in their head, you delay it long enough while back up is coming. You tell them that back up is on the way. You tell them if they do not back down, then are going to get hurt. If they kick off, then so be it. Over here we can't afford to go loco, we have to wait until they strike. As doorman, we have little choice other than to look weak, or get in their head. It is evasive SD that we have to do. Rapid SD would involve putting them down, and you know what, we in essence cannot use traditional SD. That is why we delay. Understand that or not, you have to be in a position where you dealing with coked up morons, morons carrying bladed credit cards, shanks, knifes and the worst, morons wielding broken bottles. Hey, battering the crap out of someone is not the only form of SD. Using a palm strike etc. is not the only form of SD. Using your brain and being clever about is also a form of SD. You also use their narrow frame of reference on how you defend yourself, they expect you to fight. Using that against them is also SD. Anything to get yourself home safely. The ultimate SD, you don't get arrested. My take, take it or leave it.


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, with the scenario as shown with the bad guy practically with his hand on the gun it gets real hard to do much of anything effective in time. At that range getting hold of the weapon arm and trying to control it seems like it might be the best you could hope for. When you said that grapple attempts failed, did you just mean they failed to stop the bad guy from reaching the gun or that there was no luck in controlling the weapon arm?
> 
> You mentioned varying the distance to the gun - how far away did it have to be before the situation got more manageable?


Grappling attempts failed to stop him bringing the gun to bear.  None of us claims to be any more than practical when it comes to grappling so a highly skilled person would obviously have more options than we do. But that is what guys like Tim Larkin are about, that is what Krav is about. We are not training people to grapple. The person being trained to use these techniques is likely to have little, if any, previous training and we have found when they do have some training, often it is not of much benefit.

In terms of distance, if the gun was even 6 inches further away it gave you time because bad guy had to reach further and couldn't just grab and roll. 

Another question was, how was he on the ground and we were so close? Hard to explain unless it was the end point of the scenario where we are rushing in while bad guy is scrambling for his weapon. In that case your momentum would enable you to do much more. A second option could be that we were previous engaged, something happened causing him to drop the weapon and he is diving for it. Then you question why wouldn't you have pushed him away or dived for the weapon yourself.

I think it's easiest to say what is being shown is an illustration of what you might do in that situation rather than a drill that is practical in a situation that is completely variable.


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> Simply put, if you are facing someone down intent on fighting you, you turn it around. You get in their head, you delay it long enough while back up is coming. You tell them that back up is on the way. You tell them if they do not back down, then are going to get hurt. If they kick off, then so be it. Over here we can't afford to go loco, *we have to wait* *until they strike*. As doorman, we have little choice other than to look weak, or get in their head. It is evasive SD that we have to do. Rapid SD would involve putting them down, and you know what, we in essence cannot use traditional SD. That is why we delay. Understand that or not, you have to be in a position where you dealing with coked up morons, morons carrying bladed credit cards, shanks, knifes and the worst, morons wielding broken bottles. Hey, battering the crap out of someone is not the only form of SD. Using a palm strike etc. is not the only form of SD. Using your brain and being clever about is also a form of SD. You also use their narrow frame of reference on how you defend yourself, they expect you to fight. Using that against them is also SD. Anything to get yourself home safely. The ultimate SD, you don't get arrested. My take, take it or leave it.




We don't have to wait until they strike, that's a myth. The law here says that if you are in fear of your life you can strike first and you can use a weapon if you have something you can use.
contrary to what many believe no one has ever been prosecuted in this country for legitimately defending themselves, the CPS even put out a statement proving this. My instructor is a head doorman in Newcastle and they do use traditional SD in fact they use TMA techniques to 'defend' themselves. It's one of the toughest places in the UK to do the doors, they don't delay, they get rid of asap. It doesn't always have to be 'fighting' though but you can if you have to.

the law on self defence. If you look under pre-emptive strike you will see there is no law that says you have to wait to be hit!
Self Defence Legal Guidance The Crown Prosecution Service

There is also a bit that covers security guards and doormen and such under 'public duty'.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Grappling attempts failed to stop him bringing the gun to bear.  None of us claims to be any more than practical when it comes to grappling so a highly skilled person would obviously have more options than we do. But that is what guys like Tim Larkin are about, that is what Krav is about. We are not training people to grapple. The person being trained to use these techniques is likely to have little, if any, previous training and we have found when they do have some training, often it is not of much benefit.
> 
> In terms of distance, if the gun was even 6 inches further away it gave you time because bad guy had to reach further and couldn't just grab and roll.
> 
> Another question was, how was he on the ground and we were so close? Hard to explain unless it was the end point of the scenario where we are rushing in while bad guy is scrambling for his weapon. In that case your momentum would enable you to do much more. A second option could be that we were previous engaged, something happened causing him to drop the weapon and he is diving for it. Then you question why wouldn't you have pushed him away or dived for the weapon yourself.
> 
> I think it's easiest to say what is being shown is an illustration of what you might do in that situation rather than a drill that is practical in a situation that is completely variable.



Good points all around.

I'd probably feel more comfortable trying to control the weapon arm than relying on the kick, but I've got thousands of hours of grappling experience. For someone without that background, the kick might offer better odds.

Interesting to hear that having the gun even six inches further makes such a difference. Distancing really is hugely important.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Transk53 said:


> Simply put, if you are facing someone down intent on fighting you, you turn it around. You get in their head, you delay it long enough while back up is coming. You tell them that back up is on the way. You tell them if they do not back down, then are going to get hurt. If they kick off, then so be it. Over here we can't afford to go loco, we have to wait until they strike. As doorman, we have little choice other than to look weak, or get in their head. It is evasive SD that we have to do. Rapid SD would involve putting them down, and you know what, we in essence cannot use traditional SD. That is why we delay. Understand that or not, you have to be in a position where you dealing with coked up morons, morons carrying bladed credit cards, shanks, knifes and the worst, morons wielding broken bottles. Hey, battering the crap out of someone is not the only form of SD. Using a palm strike etc. is not the only form of SD. Using your brain and being clever about is also a form of SD. You also use their narrow frame of reference on how you defend yourself, they expect you to fight. Using that against them is also SD. Anything to get yourself home safely. The ultimate SD, you don't get arrested. My take, take it or leave it.



So... I'm not seeing anything there about not ending it as quickly as possible. I see stuff about deescalating, I see stuff about redirecting. And I agree with all that, especially since I *do* deal with "coked up morons, morons carrying bladed credit cards, shanks, knifes and the worst, morons wielding broken bottles" as well as people with guns.
What I don't see is anything remotely connected to not ending it as quickly as possible. What you said came across as meaning extending the encounter longer than absolutely necessary. That's entirely different to what you're saying here.


----------



## Hanzou

Would this work?

Tim's reactions to the strikes are pretty over the top. I hope he doesn't do that when he really trains people.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Would this work?
> 
> Tim's reactions to the strikes are pretty over the top. I hope he doesn't do that when he really trains people.


So we're fraud busting now huh?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Would this work?



Maybe. I don't personally care for the elbow strike to the solar plexus from that position. The angles are bad, and you're likely to end up striking with the entire forearm, which spreads out the impact too much. I'd more likely use a fist or palm heel.



Hanzou said:


> Tim's reactions to the strikes are pretty over the top. I hope he doesn't do that when he really trains people.



Not really. I've seen people with far more dramatic reactions to real life strikes. And I've seen people with far less reaction. It's a reasonable demo.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*K-man it is nice that you had the opportunity to put the scenario into play in your training.  Very cool.*

One thing I have found interesting in training drills and scenarios is to have a weapon/tool come into play spontaneously or out of the blue. (ie. thrown on the floor, placed on a shelf, drawn from a concealed location, etc.)  The dynamics of the training rapidly shift to working to getting control of the tool or preventing the other person from getting control of it.  When done out of the blue without anyone knowing about it the reactions are interesting.  Whoever reacts quickly to the unexpected stimulus of the tool placement has potentially a great advantage.  I have seen people react immediately, delayed reaction and someone have an "oh ****" moment because they didn't react and the other person did.  Interesting training for sure!


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> We don't have to wait until they strike, that's a myth. The law here says that if you are in fear of your life you can strike first and you can use a weapon if you have something you can use.
> contrary to what many believe no one has ever been prosecuted in this country for legitimately defending themselves, the CPS even put out a statement proving this. My instructor is a head doorman in Newcastle and they do use traditional SD in fact they use TMA techniques to 'defend' themselves. It's one of the toughest places in the UK to do the doors, they don't delay, they get rid of asap. It doesn't always have to be 'fighting' though but you can if you have to.
> 
> the law on self defence. If you look under pre-emptive strike you will see there is no law that says you have to wait to be hit!
> Self Defence Legal Guidance The Crown Prosecution Service
> 
> There is also a bit that covers security guards and doormen and such under 'public duty'.



Obviously different where you are then. Down here, you can't do nothing like that. Two of my fellow doorman got arrested after a code black. Got jumped by 10 aggressors, but they got suspended for three months without work. I got in trouble just for hauling some idiot out of Oceana, just because he alleged assault. The jumped up inspector wanted to view the CCTV. I had my head door come down to see me, and when he told I could not believe it. Nah, we cannot preempt anything down here, if we do, it has to be a dangerous threat. The only thing we do is push. The criminal protectection society do not like door staff. We have justify everything sadly. Door staff getting arrested after a code black says it all.


----------



## Tez3

Transk you can disagree with me but I've told you what the law actually is. It is not a different law where you are, it still stands. I assume none of the incidents you mentioned have gone to court?
Firstly, why wouldn't the inspector want to look at the cctv? An allegation of assault has been made, of course he's going to look at it, it will prove whether you or the person making the allegation is telling the truth. Are you upset that the inspector didn't believe you immediately?
Arresting someone doesn't actually mean much, it's likely to happen to anyone involved in a violent situation, when the police arrive at the scene and there's allegations flying everywhere they cannot just pick a side to believe so everyone gets arrested, very easy to de-arrest, it separates people up for a start so that statements can be made. It is hard if you feel you are being arrested for nothing but can you tell who is telling the truth is you arrive at a fight scene? Any police officer will tell you the same. You can't assume that anyone is telling the truth or in fact lying. I assume that the cctv actually cleared you?
Do you feel you shouldn't have to justify anything? Police officers have to justify what they do ( and they do *have* to trust me) why shouldn't doormen?


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Would this work?
> 
> Tim's reactions to the strikes are pretty over the top. I hope he doesn't do that when he really trains people.


I think the question should always be 'could this work?'

Reactions like this are important to set up the next technique, so I disagree that his reactions are over the top. You can't strike someone full on the throat in training so there will always be a compromise,mbut you already know that because you have dismissed it as unrealistic training in previous threads.

So could it work? Certainly. I like the neck strike and the body movement behind the strike and I like the groin strike with the shin.  In between we have the elbow strike which like *Dirty Dog*, I would question.

My biggest concern though is how often is the person going to train for this situation? Unless she is going to train it enough for it to become instinctive, I have concerns as to how effective it would be in a real situation.


----------



## Tez3

K-man said:


> I think the question should always be 'could this work?'
> 
> Reactions like this are important to set up the next technique, so I disagree that his reactions are over the top. You can't strike someone full on the throat in training so there will always be a compromise,mbut you already know that because you have dismissed it as unrealistic training in previous threads.
> 
> So could it work? Certainly. I like the neck strike and the body movement behind the strike and I like the groin strike with the shin.  In between we have the elbow strike which like *Dirty Dog*, I would question.
> 
> *My biggest concern though is how often is the person going to train for this situation?* Unless she is going to train it enough for it to become instinctive, I have concerns as to how effective it would be in a real situation.



Well, line up a row of paedophiles and allow her to practice on the as many times as needed for it to become instinctive? The way we are going here we will have a long enough line for most women to practice on, all 'famous names' too including Rolf Harris, now sitting in prison.


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> Well, line up a row of paedophiles and allow her to practice on the as many times as needed for it to become instinctive? The way we are going here we will have a long enough line for most women to practice on, all 'famous names' too including Rolf Harris, now sitting in prison.


Can I suggest that you add rapists to the line up, just for a touch of realism!


----------



## Tez3

Transk, have you tried any of Geoff Thompson's courses? Highly recommended.


----------



## tshadowchaser

saw something that DD mentioned and the thought came to me  who says that the gun did not belong to the guy standing. I know that dose not negate what your next move is if your standing  but dose it change what you do if your the guy on the ground


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> Not really. I've seen people with far more dramatic reactions to real life strikes. And I've seen people with far less reaction. It's a reasonable demo.



If you're striking vital areas, that's fine, but he's basing follow-up attacks on those exaggerated reactions. In the first vid, the entire follow-up was based on the throat kick. His parter even gurgled for air after impact. He did it again at a few points in this vid. That's a problem, because there's no way you can predict how someone is going to react to a strike.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> If you're striking vital areas, that's fine, but he's basing follow-up attacks on those exaggerated reactions. In the first vid, the entire follow-up was based on the throat kick. His parter even gurgled for air after impact. He did it again at a few points in this vid. That's a problem, because there's no way you can predict how someone is going to react to a strike.



You don't consider your throat a "vital area"? I certainly do. I also consider my testicles to be pretty damned important. So does my wife. Your mileage may vary, of course.

He has to react in some manner, and only a moron would suggest that they do a full force strike to the throat for practice. Given the reactions I've seen to strikes, his are middle of the road.
How do YOU think he should have reacted, since you're obviously convinced that these reactions are inappropriate?


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> You don't consider your throat a "vital area"? I certainly do. I also consider my testicles to be pretty damned important. So does my wife. Your mileage may vary, of course.



You misread my post. I have no problem with the individual strikes to the throat and the nuts. Like I said, those are vital areas, that's fine. My issue is the follow-ups based on the exaggerated reaction to the strikes.



> He has to react in some manner, and only a moron would suggest that they do a full force strike to the throat for practice. Given the reactions I've seen to strikes, his are middle of the road.
> How do YOU think he should have reacted, since you're obviously convinced that these reactions are inappropriate?



Maybe turn it down a notch, and not base follow-up techniques on those reactions?


----------



## ballen0351

I've seen more "exaggerated" responses from UFC fighters that take an accidental hit to the groin then this.    I didn't see anything too terribly wrong with this.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> You misread my post. I have no problem with the individual strikes to the throat and the nuts. Like I said, those are vital areas, that's fine. My issue is the follow-ups based on the exaggerated reaction to the strikes.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe turn it down a notch, and not base follow-up techniques on those reactions?



And that's the best critique you can come up with? I've seen UFC fighters pump out more drama than that trying to pretend they got fouled.
You'll have to excuse me now, while I walk away chuckling and shaking my head sadly...


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> Transk, have you tried any of Geoff Thompson's courses? Highly recommended.



No.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> I've seen more "exaggerated" responses from UFC fighters that take an accidental hit to the groin then this.    I didn't see anything too terribly wrong with this.





Dirty Dog said:


> And that's the best critique you can come up with? I've seen UFC fighters pump out more drama than that trying to pretend they got fouled.
> You'll have to excuse me now, while I walk away chuckling and shaking my head sadly...



That's an interesting comparison, considering that the two have nothing to do with each other....


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> why would you want to prolong a 'SD' fight? surely not because you were enjoying it!



ok you have a couple of tactics here. You can stall for back up. Either being your friends or the police.

you could be fighting off the back foot like k man does waiting for the attacker to enter. I have no issue with this. Seen plenty of people knocked out by guys going backwards.

you may be concerned about the legalities as you said tez and may not finish a guy once you have him controlled. 

or a quick finish may result in high risk. And this seems to be my main disagreement.

finish the fight quickly seems to become fight in the picket or don't fight for position. All ko and no set up.

so here we have kick them in the head. I don't have an issue with that. My issue is kick them in the head and render them unable to fight.

and it is wrong.

you kick them if the option is there. But you plan that it does nothing. So now you are kicking and moving for a control. But the control does nothing. Which is fine because you feed him shots. If that first kick puts him out fine go home have a latté. 

but you don't train for quick or easy fights.

Tim Larkin gave himself the best possible result. That is the reason his fight finished in three moves.

i hive myself the worst possible result and so my fights take longer.


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> This is a good point. The scenario starts "mid stream" (cue bathroom joke...), which takes a bit of the "reality" out of RBSD...
> Maybe start with "what could I do to a gun-wielding attacker that would result in their ending up on hands and knees with the gun right... THERE... and then play it out.



a wizzer might get him there. Knee to head snap. But you would also be right on top of him.

got one.

reverse double leg. You sneak up behind him double leg the guy. He face plants. But then you have close some serious distance.


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> You don't consider your throat a "vital area"? I certainly do. I also consider my testicles to be pretty damned important. So does my wife. Your mileage may vary, of course.
> 
> He has to react in some manner, and only a moron would suggest that they do a full force strike to the throat for practice. Given the reactions I've seen to strikes, his are middle of the road.
> How do YOU think he should have reacted, since you're obviously convinced that these reactions are inappropriate?



obviously we want him to collapse from that first kick and not move again.

but it doesn't cost you anything to assume he wont.

this is another mma thing. You knock the guy out stand up. You have won but you still follow through with other techniques in case something goes wrong.

ok doesn't always happen. Some do some don't.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> you could be fighting off the back foot like k man does waiting for the attacker to enter. I have no issue with this. Seen plenty of people knocked out by guys going backwards.


Just a small point. Fighting of the back foot is different to what I am advocating. What I am doing is waiting for my attacker to commit. Once he has committed there is normally an opportunity for me to move in and take control. I'm not just moving back and picking him off as he follows.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Just a small point. Fighting of the back foot is different to what I am advocating. What I am doing is waiting for my attacker to commit. Once he has committed there is normally an opportunity for me to move in and take control. I'm not just moving back and picking him off as he follows.



which is the bit i don't like by the way. You take all the advantages of a back foot fighter and give them away to the more aggressive fighter.

but in context he chooses when to engage. So the fight is prolonged rather than you pushing the pace.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Would this work?
> 
> Tim's reactions to the strikes are pretty over the top. I hope he doesn't do that when he really trains people.



elbow to the sternum. From someone who has 20 kilos on you.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> If you're striking vital areas, that's fine, but he's basing follow-up attacks on those exaggerated reactions. In the first vid, the entire follow-up was based on the throat kick. His parter even gurgled for air after impact. He did it again at a few points in this vid. That's a problem, because there's no way you can predict how someone is going to react to a strike.


From the position he was standing she could have performed both the elbow strike and the kick to the groin even if he did not react at all.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> elbow to the sternum. From someone who has 20 kilos on you.


It was the solar plexus.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> It was the solar plexus.



so an even harder target to hit.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> so an even harder target to hit.


Not that much.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:
			
		

> We don't have to wait until they strike, that's a myth. The law here says that if you are in fear of your life you can strike first and you can use a weapon if you have something you can use.



This we can understand, and you are quite right. If myself and or one of my colleagues does feel a threat to our lives, we can strike. However in our experience, this depends on the type of copper that initially arrives on scene. Most that we have dealt with, are really quite level headed. However, some are pure and simply doorman haters. Now I offer no justification for that statement, you have to have done the job to comprehend that. So it is not just about the law, the human factor is intertwined with that.



			
				Tez3 said:
			
		

> contrary to what many believe no one has ever been prosecuted in this country for legitimately defending themselves, the CPS even put out a statement proving this.



Yes you are correct, the criminal protection society would rather get the SIA to suspend licences and put doorman out of work. Thankfully, most derive a second income from door work. There are those though who have it as their primary income.



			
				Tez3 said:
			
		

> My instructor is a head doorman in Newcastle and they do use traditional SD in fact they use *TMA techniques* to *'defend'* *themselves.*



Could you please elaborate on what TMA techniques a doorman is allowed to use. My and my team, plus other colleagues, work as part of a SIA Approved Contractor. As a senior officer, it is part of my role to suggest new training or updates at our seniors meetings. We recently undertook the accredited close control and restraint updates as part of the SIA framework. Not really that good. If you have time, could you please list what you have alluded too. Perhaps they could be used in a training package or such like. Cheeky I know, but cheers anyway.


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> This we can understand, and you are quite right. If myself and or one of my colleagues does feel a threat to our lives, we can strike. However in our experience, this depends on the type of copper that initially arrives on scene. Most that we have dealt with, are really quite level headed. However, some are pure and simply doorman haters. Now I offer no justification for that statement, you have to have done the job to comprehend that. So it is not just about the law, the human factor is intertwined with that.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes you are correct, the criminal protection society would rather get the SIA to suspend licences and put doorman out of work. Thankfully, most derive a second income from door work. There are those though who have it as their primary income.
> 
> 
> 
> Could you please elaborate on what TMA techniques a doorman is allowed to use. My and my team, plus other colleagues, work as part of a SIA Approved Contractor. As a senior officer, it is part of my role to suggest new training or updates at our seniors meetings. We recently undertook the accredited close control and restraint updates as part of the SIA framework. Not really that good. If you have time, could you please list what you have alluded too. Perhaps they could be used in a training package or such like. Cheeky I know, but cheers anyway.




Firstly, I have worked both sides both on the doors and as a copper.
One of the reasons I asked if you have trained with Geoff Thompson is that he's one of the best trainers in the business, knows door work like the back of his hand, knows what works, what doesn't. Have a look at what he's offering.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> Firstly, I have worked both sides both on the doors and as a copper.
> One of the reasons I asked if you have trained with Geoff Thompson is that he's one of the best trainers in the business, knows door work like the back of his hand, knows what works, what doesn't. Have a look at what he's offering.



Cool. Thank you. I will pass on his details onto the company management. Thanks again!


----------



## Tez3

The man....


----------



## Tez3

Try this as well, Coaches The British Combat Association I'd look at Mo Teague, the guy does what it says on the can, he's the real thing. Not too far away in Dorset.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> From the position he was standing she could have performed both the elbow strike and the kick to the groin even if he did not react at all.



This is what I'm talking about:









 I would have preferred no reaction over the reactions he was doing in both vids. For example, the elbow to the solar plexus is made more potent because the attacker is supposedly holding his throat and sticking his chest out after a throat strike.

After the elbow, his legs supposedly open up so that you can kick him in the groin.


----------



## Tez3




----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> elbow to the sternum. From someone who has 20 kilos on you.



Yeah that too.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> That's an interesting comparison, considering that the two have nothing to do with each other....


Really?  I big bad MMA fighter accidentally get hit in the groin and drops to his knees in the "cage" where to people like you is the only place where you see real fighting.  That's ok but a guy bends over on a training video and it's way over the top?  Ok pal whatever you say.  You can do better where is your training videos


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Really?  I big bad MMA fighter accidentally get hit in the groin and drops to his knees in the "cage" where to people like you is the only place where you see real fighting.  That's ok but a guy bends over on a training video and it's way over the top?  Ok pal whatever you say.



The big bad MMA fighter isn't teaching people how to defend themselves.



> You can do better where is your training videos



Check out Stephan Kesting's self defense vids. Those would be the type of SD vids I would put out.


----------



## Tez3

And I would put out videos like Beyoncé.......


----------



## Transk53

Hanzou said:


> The big bad MMA fighter isn't teaching people how to defend themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> Check out Stephan Kesting's self defense vids. Those would be the type of SD vids I would put out.



Stephan Kesting Grapplearts

This fella?
Copied on my phone, hope linkage works.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> The big bad MMA fighter isn't teaching people how to defend themselves.


So when you hit in the groin what is the proper reaction?  Stand there and laugh?  If it can drop a trained fighter wearing a cup to his knees why is it out of the realm of possibilities to make a man bend over?


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> Stephan Kesting Grapplearts
> 
> This fella?
> Copied on my phone, hope linkage works.




Teach yourself by video, very expensive too.


----------



## Hanzou

Transk53 said:


> Stephan Kesting Grapplearts
> 
> This fella?
> Copied on my phone, hope linkage works.



Yep. He has a pretty solid self defense series.



ballen0351 said:


> So when you hit in the groin what is the proper reaction?  Stand there and laugh?  If it can drop a trained fighter wearing a cup to his knees why is it out of the realm of possibilities to make a man bend over?



If you read my post, I wasn't talking about the groin strike, I'm talking about the exaggerated reactions that make the strikes supposedly possible. That argument has nothing to do with what a professional athlete does when another professional athlete kicks him in the groin.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Yep. He has a pretty solid self defense series.
> .




At quite a price! does he actually teach real people in classes or just sell merchandise?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> If you read my post, I wasn't talking about the groin strike, I'm talking about the exaggerated reactions that make the strikes supposedly possible. That argument has nothing to do with what a professional athlete does when another professional athlete kicks him in the groin.


Sure it does you have said countless times in the"cage" is how we see if these things really work


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> Would this work?
> 
> Tim's reactions to the strikes are pretty over the top. I hope he doesn't do that when he really trains people.



It's a news fluff piece that is essentially advertising for Larkin. Part of selling the product is to make it seem like the reporter can use the material shown effectively even though she's had all of 3 minutes instruction and is doing the technique terribly. It's pretty much a formula that I've seen any time a news station runs a bit on women's self defense and sends a reporter to a local dojo for a set piece. The instructor will act like the reporters strikes are devastating and will take a dive for any half-*** takedowns.

I do agree with other posters that the elbow to the midsection is the weakest part of the sequence.



K-man said:


> My biggest concern though is how often is the person going to train for this situation? Unless she is going to train it enough for it to become instinctive, I have concerns as to how effective it would be in a real situation.



This is my complaint in general with any sort of short-term "self-defense" seminars/courses that focus on physical techniques. Learning to fight effectively requires building ingrained skills and attributes and that takes time.



ballen0351 said:


> I've seen more "exaggerated" responses from UFC fighters that take an accidental hit to the groin then this. I didn't see anything too terribly wrong with this.



For the record, probably 95% of the time when a professional fighter in the ring displays a dramatic reaction to a groin shot it's a deliberate act to work the ref  - trying to get the opponent penalized, or get some rest time, or just trying to get the ref watching the opponent for further infractions. I watched Bernard Hopkins do this in a recent fight. He would land a solid low blow to his opponent at an angle where the ref couldn't see, then when his opponent later paid him back in view of the ref he put on a show worthy of the Shakespearean stage trying to demonstrate how badly he had been fouled. (He did the same thing later in the fight with rabbit punches.)


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> At quite a price! does he actually teach real people in classes or just sell merchandise?



Both. He teaches out of Canada. He's pretty respected all around, and he has tons of free stuff to view and read.


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> It's a news fluff piece that is essentially advertising for Larkin. Part of selling the product is to make it seem like the reporter can use the material shown effectively even though she's had all of 3 minutes instruction and is doing the technique terribly. It's pretty much a formula that I've seen any time a news station runs a bit on women's self defense and sends a reporter to a local dojo for a set piece. The instructor will act like the reporters strikes are devastating and will take a dive for any half-*** takedowns.
> 
> I do agree with other posters that the elbow to the midsection is the weakest part of the sequence.



Well he does the same thing in the OP video too. Shin kick to the throat causes guy to roll over onto his back gasping for air. This allows you to stomp his chest. Assailant is so hurt by the stomp and throat kick that you can neck crank him to death.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Well he does the same thing in the OP video too. Shin kick to the throat causes guy to roll over onto his back gasping for air. This allows you to stomp his chest. Assailant is so hurt by the stomp and throat kick that you can neck crank him to death.


Whats the proper response to getting kicked in the throat?


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> Whats the proper response to getting kicked in the throat?



AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHH?


----------



## Transk53

Choke and die as your puke goes into the lungs?


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> Whats the proper response to getting kicked in the throat?




To paraphrase.... 'No, I expect you to die Mr Bond'


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Really?  I big bad MMA fighter accidentally get hit in the groin and drops to his knees in the "cage" where to people like you is the only place where you see real fighting.  That's ok but a guy bends over on a training video and it's way over the top?  Ok pal whatever you say.  You can do better where is your training videos



are you seriously comparing the reactions of someone who actually got hit to someone who is pretending to be hit?


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> are you seriously comparing the reactions of someone who actually got hit to someone who is pretending to be hit?


Thats the point of the drill.  Or would you prefer she really kicks him in the groin?  You look at reactions from real strikes and base your training off of them.  It how training works.  When we do active shooter training using guns that are not real guess what when you "fake shoot" someone they fake die


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Thats the point of the drill.  Or would you prefer she really kicks him in the groin?  You look at reactions from real strikes and base your training off of them.  It how training works.  When we do active shooter training using guns that are not real guess what when you "fake shoot" someone they fake die



toned down a notch would be nice.

otherwise kick the inner leg. Then you can kick hard and get a real result. And of course it is not that hard to make it a groin kick. Hence the ufc clips.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Not that much.



smaller. I don't really rate body elbows for that sort of application.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> toned down a notch would be nice.
> 
> otherwise kick the inner leg. Then you can kick hard and get a real result. And of course it is not that hard to make it a groin kick. Hence the ufc clips.


Ok your a clown good day


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Ok your a clown good day



rage quitting again?

so the inner leg kick. Exactly the same set up as the groin kick except for a slight angle.

you can train it live,it is a viable shot in its own right and if you can drop someone with an inner leg kick you will cut them in half with the groin kick.

it will even make your head kick from op a bit snappier.


----------



## Transk53

Seriously, getting kicked in the nuts hurts. What is worse is by a women, cos by golly they kick with some venom!


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> rage quitting again?


No but I doubt you actually even train in any martial arts with the nonsense you spew out sometimes 


> so the inner leg kick. Exactly the same set up as the groin kick except for a slight angle.


Except your training a groin kick not an inner leg luck.  It's two different things.  You don't train an arm bar by doing a Kimora 


> you can train it live,it is a viable shot in its own right and if you can drop someone with an inner leg kick you will cut them in half with the groin kick.


So if I can drop someone with it why would I train it live? How many times can I take that kick live in training before I'm hurt and can't train anymore? Even in a red man suit getting kicked full power still hurts 


> it will even make your head kick from op a bit snappier.


Lol no


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> rage quitting again?
> 
> *so the inner leg kick.* Exactly the same set up as the groin kick except for a slight angle.
> 
> you can train it live,it is a viable shot in its own right and if you can drop someone with an inner leg kick you will cut them in half with the groin kick.
> 
> it will even make your head kick from op a bit snappier.



So, hands up chaps who is willing to stand there taking inner thigh kicks? I pride myself on being pretty accurate with kicks but I couldn't absolutely say with the best will in the world I will be on target 100% of times.............

Another thing, groin kicks...wouldn't you say any guy intent on attacking a woman will for sure be careful to guard his groin knowing that women are mostly told to kick a man 'where it hurts'? Is a man who is attacking a woman going stand straight on so he can be kicked in the nuts?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> So, hands up chaps who is willing to stand there taking inner thigh kicks? I pride myself on being pretty accurate with kicks but I couldn't absolutely say with the best will in the world I will be on target 100% of times.............
> 
> Another thing, groin kicks...wouldn't you say any guy intent on attacking a woman will for sure be careful to guard his groin knowing that women are mostly told to kick a man 'where it hurts'? Is a man who is attacking a woman going stand straight on so he can be kicked in the nuts?



we do it. That is our circle of death. Stand in a circle leg kick the guy next to you. You can choose to either pass it on or give it back.

i have been kicked in the groin sparring.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> we do it. That is our circle of death. Stand in a circle leg kick the guy next to you. You can choose to either pass it on or give it back.
> 
> i have been kicked in the groin sparring.




Do you not think 'circle of death' is a little over dramatic, a bit Cobra Kai-ish? Seriously.

A good many people, including women have been kicked in the groin when sparring, it's nothing to boast of.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> No but I doubt you actually even train in any martial arts with the nonsense you spew out sometimes
> 
> Except your training a groin kick not an inner leg luck.  It's two different things.  You don't train an arm bar by doing a Kimora
> 
> So if I can drop someone with it why would I train it live? How many times can I take that kick live in training before I'm hurt and can't train anymore? Even in a red man suit getting kicked full power still hurts
> 
> Lol no



i have proof i train martial arts. I am my own external source. 

a full contact groin kick is different to a non contact one. So there is very few people who will train the kick the ln exactly the way they expect to throw it.

if you train resisted you can throw that inner leg kick at what ever level of resistance you are going sometimes that means that kick can be thrown pretty hard.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Do you not think 'circle of death' is a little over dramatic, a bit Cobra Kai-ish? Seriously.
> 
> A good many people, including women have been kicked in the groin when sparring, it's nothing to boast of.



it is freaking ridiculous. But conditioning drills can get pretty boring. So a bit of spice is not the worst thing in the world.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> i have proof i train martial arts. I am my own external source.
> 
> *a full contact groin kick is different to a non contact one.* So there is very few people who will train the kick the ln exactly the way they expect to throw it.
> 
> if you train resisted you can throw that inner leg kick at what ever level of resistance you are going sometimes that means that kick can be thrown pretty hard.



I hope people here appreciate my huge efforts in *not *saying anything about this comment. You have no idea the self control needed here. I'm not being sarcastic here either.


----------



## Transk53

drop bear said:


> if you train resisted you can throw that inner leg kick at what ever level of resistance you are going sometimes that means that kick can be thrown pretty hard.



Do you mean a leg resistance, attached to each leg with the elastic cord attachment to both legs, or ankles in this case?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> it is freaking ridiculous. But conditioning drills can get pretty boring. So a bit of spice is not the worst thing in the world.




I think you need a Scots Guards Regimental Sergeant Major taking your conditioning work as we do, I guarantee you will never ever be bored.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i have proof i train martial arts. I am my own external source.


Legend in your own mind.  


> a full contact groin kick is different to a non contact one.


Lol ummmm yeah



> So there is very few people who will train the kick the ln exactly the way they expect to throw it.[\quote]
> False perhaps your just training poorly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if you train resisted you can throw that inner leg kick at what ever level of resistance you are going sometimes that means that kick can be thrown pretty hard.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok
Click to expand...


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> i have been kicked in the groin sparring.


We've all been kicked in the groin whilst sparring.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Real world reaction to a strike (to whatever target) can range anywhere from total incapacitation to no visible effect at all.

For purposes of training, if I'm drilling a sequence with a partner and we're not actually hitting full force, I prefer to have the partner act out the _minimum_ reaction necessary for the specific sequence we are training to work. That way I'm not counting on a best case scenario if I ever have to use the techniques in real life.

Demos often illustrate more of a best case scenario for dramatic effect.

I'm not sure of the context the original video was created for. If it was just intended as a demonstration of a scenario where overwhelming, potentially lethal force might be justified then I can see why he might have his training partner acting out some of the potential effects of the techniques employed. Hopefully he doesn't actually train on a day-to-day basis with his training partner acting as if every single blow was a devastating hit.


----------



## ballen0351

Ok Tony what's the appropriate response to a full force kick to the throat?


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> so the inner leg kick. Exactly the same set up as the groin kick except for a slight angle.
> 
> you can train it live,it is a viable shot in its own right and if you can drop someone with an inner leg kick you will cut them in half with the groin kick.
> 
> it will even make your head kick from op a bit snappier.


I hate to disagree but the kick to the inner thigh is totally different to the groin kick.
In a lot of karate sparring the kick to the groin is a snap kick with the instep. Only a fool would try that in a real situation. It is too easy to avoid. That is the type of kick you could redirect to the inner thigh where again it is of limited use. 

A kick to the inner thigh comes in three forms, at least when I teach it, and the angle and direction are critical. Because the attacker's foot is on the ground and it takes a lot of force to move the body from pushing that point, most of the power goes into the leg to cause maximum effect. Striking the nerve is what causes the drop.

The groin kick has totally different dynamics. Again there are multiple forms of which the kick with the shin shown in this demo is my preferred option. It is the only one that works as designed when the attacker protects reflexively by pulling the hips back. It is delivered as you would kick a football so to say you can redirect that to the inner thigh is simply not true. You have to pull the kick in training. 

As to making the kick to the head snappier ... hmm! I think we are living on different planets.

Interesting I tried the OP scenario with a different set of guys last night with an interesting outcome. But I'll wait for you guys that know all about self defence to finish your intriguing discussion before I pass it on. I'm going back for the popcorn.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> Ok Tony what's the appropriate response to a full force kick to the throat?



I'm not sure I'd apply the word "appropriate" in this context. It's not a matter of etiquette. I assume you're asking what a _realistic_ reaction might be.

As I mentioned before, there is a huge range of realistic outcomes.

If you connect cleanly at the perfect angle with a hard kick to the fully exposed throat of someone who is on all fours and not braced for it, a very likely outcome is incapacitation or even death. Some folks might fall backwards as the guy in the video did, some might fall to the side away from you, some might collapse forward after the initial impact, some particularly determined individuals might even grab the gun, roll over and start shooting until they pass out due to a crushed windpipe.

There are guys out there who do demonstrations of taking hard directly to the throat without ill effect. It's pretty much a matter of having really strong neck muscles and being braced for the shot.  Hopefully you wouldn't be fighting one of those guys and he wouldn't be braced for the shot. Still, if the guy you are fighting does have really strong neck muscles and tightens them up on impact, he might be able to absorb much of the damage if your kick didn't land as solidly as you might hope.

It's also _very_ likely that you wouldn't manage that perfect, clean, powerful shot directly into the windpipe. Even if your aim is perfect (which would be lucky under the circumstances) , all the guy has to do is tuck his chin or shrug his shoulders or turn his head slightly, or get one arm in the way and your kick is now landing on the head, neck, shoulders, or body. In that case, the outcome could range anywhere from a knockout to no immediate effect at all.

For purposes of training, the reaction I would want would depend on what scenario I was trying to drill. If I was drilling a sequence where I managed to knock him away from the gun with my initial kick, I would have my partner react by moving back the minimum distance to where I had a chance to intercept him with my next technique before he made another grab for the gun. If the situation ever came up in real life and the initial kick worked better than that, then great! But I'd hate to count on the best case scenario and then not have it work out.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Interesting I tried the OP scenario with a different set of guys last night with an interesting outcome. But I'll wait for you guys that know all about self defence to finish your intriguing discussion before I pass it on. I'm going back for the popcorn.



Looking forward to hearing about your second run on the experiment. More data is always better.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm not sure I'd apply the word "appropriate" in this context. It's not a matter of etiquette. I assume you're asking what a _realistic_ reaction might be.
> 
> As I mentioned before, there is a huge range of realistic outcomes.
> 
> If you connect cleanly at the perfect angle with a hard kick to the fully exposed throat of someone who is on all fours and not braced for it, a very likely outcome is incapacitation or even death. Some folks might fall backwards as the guy in the video did, some might fall to the side away from you, some might collapse forward after the initial impact, some particularly determined individuals might even grab the gun, roll over and start shooting until they pass out due to a crushed windpipe.
> 
> There are guys out there who do demonstrations of taking hard directly to the throat without ill effect. It's pretty much a matter of having really strong neck muscles and being braced for the shot.  Hopefully you wouldn't be fighting one of those guys and he wouldn't be braced for the shot. Still, if the guy you are fighting does have really strong neck muscles and tightens them up on impact, he might be able to absorb much of the damage if your kick didn't land as solidly as you might hope.
> 
> It's also _very_ likely that you wouldn't manage that perfect, clean, powerful shot directly into the windpipe. Even if your aim is perfect (which would be lucky under the circumstances) , all the guy has to do is tuck his chin or shrug his shoulders or turn his head slightly, or get one arm in the way and your kick is now landing on the head, neck, shoulders, or body. In that case, the outcome could range anywhere from a knockout to no immediate effect at all.
> 
> For purposes of training, the reaction I would want would depend on what scenario I was trying to drill. If I was drilling a sequence where I managed to knock him away from the gun with my initial kick, I would have my partner react by moving back the minimum distance to where I had a chance to intercept him with my next technique before he made another grab for the gun. If the situation ever came up in real life and the initial kick worked better than that, then great! But I'd hate to count on the best case scenario and then not have it work out.


I've never seen anyone kicked full force in the throat but I have seen a guy get kicked full force in the face while he was on all fours and he went out like a light.  I don't know too many folks that can take a full force kick to the head or face while on all fours and still be ok.  That's why is illegal in MMA to kick or knee a guy on all fours in the head because it could kill you.  I think if your training for a missed or glancing blow you mat have a point.  You pull that off correctly it's all over.


----------



## Dirty Dog

ballen0351 said:


> I've never seen anyone kicked full force in the throat but I have seen a guy get kicked full force in the face while he was on all fours and he went out like a light.  I don't know too many folks that can take a full force kick to the head or face while on all fours and still be ok.  That's why is illegal in MMA to kick or knee a guy on all fours in the head because it could kill you.  I think if your training for a missed or glancing blow you mat have a point.  You pull that off correctly it's all over.



A sample size of one is not exactly good science...
I do not disagree that a kick like this can be devastating, just pointing out that it isn't always. Nothing is always...
I've seen too many people smacked full on with bats and crowbars and pipes and bricks and whatever else you can think of come in, get a few stitches, and be discharged to think otherwise.
But I still maintain that as a demo, there's nothing inherently wrong with the videos shown here. We can quibble over the specifics (as I said, I don't care for the elbow to the solar plexus in the most recent video due to the angles shown) but they're demos.
It's not like he's showing those silly no-touch chi knockouts...


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> I've never seen anyone kicked full force in the throat but I have seen a guy get kicked full force in the face while he was on all fours and he went out like a light.  I don't know too many folks that can take a full force kick to the head or face while on all fours and still be ok.  That's why is illegal in MMA to kick or knee a guy on all fours in the head because it could kill you.  I think if your training for a missed or glancing blow you mat have a point.  You pull that off correctly it's all over.



I've seen downed fighters get kicked in the head and be knocked out. I've also seen downed fighters get kicked in the head and keep fighting. It's absolutely a dangerous and effective  technique. I just believe in training for the worst case outcome more than the best case.


----------



## ballen0351

Dirty Dog said:


> A sample size of one is not exactly good science...
> I do not disagree that a kick like this can be devastating, just pointing out that it isn't always. Nothing is always...
> I've seen too many people smacked full on with bats and crowbars and pipes and bricks and whatever else you can think of come in, get a few stitches, and be discharged to think otherwise.
> But I still maintain that as a demo, there's nothing inherently wrong with the videos shown here. We can quibble over the specifics (as I said, I don't care for the elbow to the solar plexus in the most recent video due to the angles shown) but they're demos.
> It's not like he's showing those silly no-touch chi knockouts...


I agree there is no always or never.  I watched a 17 year old girl a few weeks ago take a round to the face and was walking and talk.  But playing the odds you get shot in the face your in trouble.  Playing the odds you get booted in the face your going out.  I get training for worst case.  That wasn't the debate.  Saying the reaction in training in the video was over the top was kinda silly.  So what's the appropriate response for training?  In a Kara we do in Goju you kick the attacker he bends forward as you throw an elbow.  Should we not train that the kick causes you to bend over because it might not make everyone bend over?  Or do we train the odds.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> I've seen downed fighters get kicked in the head and be knocked out. I've also seen downed fighters get kicked in the head and keep fighting. It's absolutely a dangerous and effective  technique. I just believe in training for the worst case outcome more than the best case.


Worst case is you miss and he shoots you.  So........... not much to train then.


----------



## Tez3

Dirty Dog said:


> A sample size of one is not exactly good science...
> I do not disagree that a kick like this can be devastating, just pointing out that it isn't always. Nothing is always...
> I've seen too many people smacked full on with bats and crowbars and pipes and bricks and whatever else you can think of come in, get a few stitches, and be discharged to think otherwise.
> But I still maintain that as a demo, there's nothing inherently wrong with the videos shown here. We can quibble over the specifics (as I said, I don't care for the elbow to the solar plexus in the most recent video due to the angles shown) but they're demos.
> *It's not like he's showing those silly no-touch chi knockouts...[/*QUOTE]
> 
> .




But, but they are totally amazing! I saw one once demonstrated by a rather small Australian chap. I was totally and absolutely unimpressed, in fact I nearly choked with trying not to laugh out loud. It is amazing though..... the way people can be taken in by it. As they can be by a lot of things.....


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> Worst case is you miss and he shoots you.  So........... not much to train then.



Well ... worst case where there is still something to train for.



ballen0351 said:


> So what's the appropriate response for training? In a Kara we do in Goju you kick the attacker he bends forward as you throw an elbow. Should we not train that the kick causes you to bend over because it might not make everyone bend over? Or do we train the odds.



If you're training that particular sequence, you have the partner bend over enough to throw the elbow. Hopefully you also have other sequences you train that don't rely on that reaction, so you can be prepared either way.


----------



## Dirty Dog

ballen0351 said:


> Worst case is you miss and he shoots you.  So........... not much to train then.



Maybe... except that very few gunshots (especially single gunshots) are immediately incapacitating. You can train to keep him from firing a second (third, forth, fifth...) shot. "You've been hit in the right arm (tie that arm back)... now what can you do?"

Of course, there is a difference between training and demos, and all the videos shown here are focusing on extremely limited cases and can hardly be expected to cover every possible contingency.


----------



## ballen0351

Dirty Dog said:


> Maybe... except that very few gunshots (especially single gunshots) are immediately incapacitating. You can train to keep him from firing a second (third, forth, fifth...) shot. "You've been hit in the right arm (tie that arm back)... now what can you do?"
> 
> Of course, there is a difference between training and demos, and all the videos shown here are focusing on extremely limited cases and can hardly be expected to cover every possible contingency.


True which is why if I shoot I shoot alot and fast until you stop coming


----------



## Dirty Dog

ballen0351 said:


> True which is why if I shoot I shoot alot and fast until you stop coming



Good plan. I had a patient recently who tried to rob a gun store (but failed). When the PD caught up to him, he stabbed the officer in the arm. The officer then shot him. 5 times. At what you might guess was pretty close range...
One shot hit his right upper arm - muscle damage only, arm not incapacitated.
One shot hit his left upper arm - same result as above.
One shot grazed his abdomen on the left side - no penetration.
One shot went through and through his abdomen on the right side - soft tissue only, no penetration of the abdominal cavity.
One shot missed completely.
This guy absolutely could have kept fighting. Fortunately he did not.

The same PD had another officer involved shooting a couple days later. This person shot at the officer and missed. The officer responded with two rounds, center mass. Perp was DRT.

As I've said in other threads, accuracy counts...

So from a training standpoint, I'd assume that you can continue to fight after being wounded. Obviously dead is dead. But being shot isn't necessarily the end of the scenario.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Dirty Dog said:


> As I've said in other threads, accuracy counts...



I suppose one favorable possibility of the head kick scenario is that if the bad guy does reach the gun, he might be concussed enough that his shots will go wild. Nothing you could count on or test in training, of course, but it could be a point in favor of that tactic.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> I hate to disagree but the kick to the inner thigh is totally different to the groin kick.
> In a lot of karate sparring the kick to the groin is a snap kick with the instep. Only a fool would try that in a real situation. It is too easy to avoid. That is the type of kick you could redirect to the inner thigh where again it is of limited use.
> 
> A kick to the inner thigh comes in three forms, at least when I teach it, and the angle and direction are critical. Because the attacker's foot is on the ground and it takes a lot of force to move the body from pushing that point, most of the power goes into the leg to cause maximum effect. Striking the nerve is what causes the drop.
> 
> The groin kick has totally different dynamics. Again there are multiple forms of which the kick with the shin shown in this demo is my preferred option. It is the only one that works as designed when the attacker protects reflexively by pulling the hips back. It is delivered as you would kick a football so to say you can redirect that to the inner thigh is simply not true. You have to pull the kick in training.
> 
> As to making the kick to the head snappier ... hmm! I think we are living on different planets.
> 
> Interesting I tried the OP scenario with a different set of guys last night with an interesting outcome. But I'll wait for you guys that know all about self defence to finish your intriguing discussion before I pass it on. I'm going back for the popcorn.



ok lets look at this simply. The groin kicks that were dropping those ufc guys. What kick do you think they were originally throwing?

inner leg kicks accidentally turn into fight ending groin kicks. But you are saying cant be done on purpose.

ok the head kick is the same as the groin kick or the inner leg kick. Or at least can be. (ok you could learn a different kick for each target. But i personally wouldn't bother.)

there are competitions where head kicks are allowed. And they are not really a different kick.

why are you messing around with a bunch of different kicks when one will do the job?


----------



## drop bear

notice there is no shortage of basic inner leg kicks hitting people in the face on the deck.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> [
> 
> 
> notice there is no shortage of basic inner leg kicks hitting people in the face on the deck.



Ugh. A 'tribute', really?

'Basic inner leg kicks'  I'm not sure what you mean by them. Do they have a name either in Japanese or Korean for this? Inner leg kicks to me are a turning/roundhouse/MT kick to the inside of the thigh.


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> notice there is no shortage of basic inner leg kicks hitting people in the face on the deck.



That vid just shows that blows to vital areas work sometimes, but are no guarantee that they'll end the confrontation.

I think it's quite dangerous to teach people, especially smaller people, that hitting someone in the throat or the groin or some other vital area is sure-fire way to end a confrontation. It most certainly is not.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> Ugh. A 'tribute', really?
> 
> 'Basic inner leg kicks'  I'm not sure what you mean by them. Do they have a name either in Japanese or Korean for this? Inner leg kicks to me are a turning/roundhouse/MT kick to the inside of the thigh.



To the ankle.


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> To the ankle.




Kicking to the ankle?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Ugh. A 'tribute', really?
> 
> 'Basic inner leg kicks'  I'm not sure what you mean by them. Do they have a name either in Japanese or Korean for this? Inner leg kicks to me are a turning/roundhouse/MT kick to the inside of the thigh.



probably.

these are turning kicks to the head on the ground. My point is they are basically the same kick.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> Kicking to the ankle?



Yes.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> probably.
> 
> these are turning kicks to the head on the ground. My point is they are basically the same kick.




Then what you mean is a turning kick to the head for goodness sake, an inside leg kick is a kick to the inside of the leg. It's not difficult to be precise.
Inside leg kick.


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> Yes.




It seems he means a turning kick to the head.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Then what you mean is a turning kick to the head for goodness sake, an inside leg kick is a kick to the inside of the leg. It's not difficult to be precise.
> Inside leg kick.



i am linking it to the inside leg kick. Because i am making a point that it is the same kicks.

so in this instance i was being precise.

inside leg kick.

groin kick

head kick on the deck.

can all be the same kick if you want to simplify your toolbox.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> That vid just shows that blows to vital areas work sometimes, but are no guarantee that they'll end the confrontation.
> 
> I think it's quite dangerous to teach people, especially smaller people, that hitting someone in the throat or the groin or some other vital area is sure-fire way to end a confrontation. It most certainly is not.


Who ever said anything was sure-fire?  Nothing is sure-fire. But to say a smaller person can't use strikes to end a fight is silly


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i am linking it to the inside leg kick. Because i am making a point that it is the same kicks.
> 
> so in this instance i was being precise.
> 
> inside leg kick.
> 
> groin kick
> 
> head kick on the deck.
> 
> can all be the same kick if you want to simplify your toolbox.


But it's not.  Inside leg kick I'd use a round house.  Groin kick I'd use a front kick or a kin geri.  To kick someone on all fours in the head I'd punt their head like a football


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> i am linking it to the inside leg kick. Because i am making a point that it is the same kicks.
> 
> so in this instance i was being precise.
> 
> inside leg kick.
> 
> groin kick
> 
> head kick on the deck.
> 
> can all be the same kick if you want to simplify your toolbox.




Oh well as long as you understand that's alright then.
 BUT you are entirely wrong, if you say turning/roundhouse/MT kick we know what you are talking about already, you just have to add the target then we know where you mean to hit and with what.
However....
The inside leg kick I've already told you what it is.
The groin kick you already been told is hit with the instep
The head kick when someone is on the ground is usually an axe kick or 'soccer' kick.
The groin and head are harder to hit with a turning/roundhouse kick.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> But it's not.  Inside leg kick I'd use a round house.  Groin kick I'd use a front kick or a kin geri.  To kick someone on all fours in the head I'd punt their head like a football



so for self defense you are learning three different kicks where one will do the job.

provided you can aim that one kick in different directions. Which is pretty useful to be able to do anyway


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> so for self defense you are learning three different kicks where one will do the job.
> 
> provided you can aim that one kick in different directions. Which is pretty useful to be able to do anyway


I know more then 3 kicks actually.  Do you learn more then one subimition?  Why one is all you need right


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> so for self defense you are learning three different kicks where one will do the job.
> 
> provided you can aim that one kick in different directions. Which is pretty useful to be able to do anyway



However they do different jobs, very hard to roundhouse kick someone when they are flat on the deck don't you think? why try to round house someone's testicles when Kin Geri will do the job beautifully?
One kick simply does not do the job I'm afraid.

I know a good deal more than three kicks, I know them inside out, through years of practice and I will pull out the exact kick to do the job. I know I'm not unique in this, most martial artists ( who use kicks) can do the same.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Oh well as long as you understand that's alright then.
> BUT you are entirely wrong, if you say turning/roundhouse/MT kick we know what you are talking about already, you just have to add the target then we know where you mean to hit and with what.
> However....
> The inside leg kick I've already told you what it is.
> The groin kick you already been told is hit with the instep
> The head kick when someone is on the ground is usually an axe kick or 'soccer' kick.
> The groin and head are harder to hit with a turning/roundhouse kick.



why cant i hit the groin with the shin?
 Inside leg kicks(the ones actually aimed at the inside leg) that slip and accidentally hit the groin do damage. So hitting either target with that one kick obviously works.

and there were a lot of flush kicks using the turning kick in that video.


----------



## Transk53

It was not a roundhouse that was presented.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> why cant i hit the groin with the shin?
> Inside leg kicks(the ones actually aimed at the inside leg) that slip and accidentally hit the groin do damage. So hitting either target with that one kick obviously works.
> 
> and there were a lot of flush kicks using the turning kick in that video.


Why hope a inside leg kick will slip to the groin.  If I want to kick the groin there is a kick for that.  If I wanna kick the outer knee there is s kick for that.  If I wanna kick the inside leg kick there is a kick for that.  If I wanna kick the ribs well yep there is a kick for that.  How many different submissions do you know


----------



## Tez3

Inside kicks are always aimed at the inside of the leg hence the name. And a 'flush' kick is?

Sure, an inside leg kick will sometimes mishit and hit the testicles but it's very inefficient. Kin Geri will do the job very well. I've put up a video of it. Now, I've chosen a TMA video without a uke to save any gentlemen from feeling a bit ill lol but you can imagine the effectiveness. When we were taught it were we shown to not just kick but to point the toes up so you can drag your foot back to hurt that bit more.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> However they do different jobs, very hard to roundhouse kick someone when they are flat on the deck don't you think? why try to round house someone's testicles when Kin Geri will do the job beautifully?
> One kick simply does not do the job I'm afraid.
> 
> I know a good deal more than three kicks, I know them inside out, through years of practice and I will pull out the exact kick to do the job. I know I'm not unique in this, most martial artists ( who use kicks) can do the same.




not hard to roundhouse a persons head if they are on all fours though. Like in the op. If they are lying flat then we need a new kick.

but why kin geri when the roundhouse works beautifully? Will that work to the inside leg?


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> not hard to roundhouse a persons head if they are on all fours though. Like in the op. If they are lying flat then we need a new kick.
> 
> but why kin geri when the roundhouse works beautifully? Will that work to the inside leg?


How do you roundhouse someone in the groin standing in front of them?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> not hard to roundhouse a persons head if they are on all fours though. Like in the op. If they are lying flat then we need a new kick.
> 
> but why kin geri when the roundhouse works beautifully? Will that work to the inside leg?



A roundhouse done traditionally will not work, no. . I'm not sure you know what a roundhouse kick is as opposed to a turning kick or a Muay Thai kick.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> I know more then 3 kicks actually.  Do you learn more then one subimition?  Why one is all you need right



do my extra submissions require my partner to pretend they work? In which case i will focus on the one i can do without help.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> How do you roundhouse someone in the groin standing in front of them?



it is a vertical roundhouse.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> do my extra submissions require my partner to pretend they work?


I dont know do they? 


> In which case i will focus on the one i can do without help.


so again for the 3rd time how many submissions do you train


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> it is a vertical roundhouse.


got a vid of that Ive never heard of it


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> it is a vertical roundhouse.




Now I have heard everything......... where's Elder's little laughing chap?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> A roundhouse done traditionally will not work, no. . I'm not sure you know what a roundhouse kick is as opposed to a turning kick or a Muay Thai kick.



do they have names in Portuguese?

honestly they are all pretty much the same thing for me. I don't have fifty kicks. I just tweek the kicks i have.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> do they have names in Portuguese?
> 
> honestly they are all pretty much the same thing for me. I don't have fifty kicks. I just tweek the kicks i have.


LOL


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> got a vid of that Ive never heard of it


----------



## Tez3

It's not often I'm lost for words..............


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


>


So which one is a Vertical Roundhouse?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Now I have heard everything......... where's Elder's little laughing chap?



fire exactly that roundhouse up the guts and it becomes a groin kick. No new techniques. No new set ups.  Every opportunity you have for an inside leg. You have for a groin.

giving it a name in Japanese doesn't change that.


----------



## Dirty Dog

drop bear said:


> it is a vertical roundhouse.



I'm sorry... what?
I've been training in TKD (which you may have heard of... it's an art that specializes in kicks...) since 1968 or '69. I've had limited experience with one or two other arts during that time.
I have never, ever, not even once, heard of a "vertical roundhouse". Could you explain this?

Or are you just making **** up as you go along to avoid admitting that maybe you're not 100% right?

(I'm so glad we got the facepalm guy back... some situations absolutely require it.)


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> So which one is a Vertical Roundhouse?



first one.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> first one.


NO NO its not


----------



## Tez3

What's Japanese for 'vertical' because I want to put it with Mawashigeri.
I already have Ushiro Mawashigeri, Ushiro Kingeri, Maegeri, Soto Mawashigeri, Fumikomi, Otoshigeri among others and I really want to add a _vertical_ Mawashigeri. I don't do Yokogeri very well these days, very powerful kick if you can do it though.


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> I'm sorry... what?
> I've been training in TKD (which you may have heard of... it's an art that specializes in kicks...) since 1968 or '69. I've had limited experience with one or two other arts during that time.
> I have never, ever, not even once, heard of a "vertical roundhouse". Could you explain this?
> 
> Or are you just making **** up as you go along to avoid admitting that maybe you're not 100% right?
> 
> (I'm so glad we got the facepalm guy back... some situations absolutely require it.)



not right about what?

that an inside leg kick that connects with the groin is a viable groin kick.

playing around with the terminology does not change that.


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> NO NO its not



totally and absolutely it was NOT.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> I dont know do they?
> 
> so again for the 3rd time how many submissions do you train


 a lot of real ones and no pretend ones. Like those Tim Larkin techniques.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> not right about what?
> 
> that an inside leg kick that connects with the groin is a viable groin kick.
> 
> playing around with the terminology does not change that.


NO thats not what you said.  You said there was a vertical roundhouse and you were wrong.  Missing a leg kick and hitting the groin isnt a technique its a miss


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> totally and absolutely it was NOT.



ok then what is it?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> not right about what?
> 
> that an inside leg kick that connects with the groin is a viable groin kick.
> 
> playing around with the terminology does not change that.




I don't suppose you want to answer DD's question? TKD does kicks a little differently from karate but not that much differently, we know what each other means when we are talking about kicks.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> NO thats not what you said.  You said there was a vertical roundhouse and you were wrong.  Missing a leg kick and hitting the groin isnt a technique its a miss



so my technique that missed has done enough damage to drop that guy. And you still don't think it is a viable technique over pretending to hit someone and them pretending to drop.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> ok then what is it?




It looked like a cross between a front kick and Kingeri, a poorly executed kick that was judged a foul, quite rightly because it also looked as if he deliberately targeted his opponent's groin whether he meant it or not. He needs to learn to kick properly. He may have been going for a front kick and misjudged the height, still a poor kick.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> a lot of real ones and no pretend ones.


why isnt one good enough


> Like those Tim Larkin techniques.


lol ok tell him that


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> so my technique that missed has done enough damage to drop that guy. And you still don't think it is a viable technique over pretending to hit someone and them pretending to drop.




If you want to bank on a missed kick, good luck with that one. You know no one has said don't target the groin, they are just saying do it properly...first time.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> so my technique that missed has done enough damage to drop that guy. And you still don't think it is a viable technique over pretending to hit someone and them pretending to drop.


Its not a technique its a miss.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I don't suppose you want to answer DD's question? TKD does kicks a little differently from karate but not that much differently, we know what each other means when we are talking about kicks.



i don't do tkd or karate  is this a tkd karate thread?

i can make up terminology as i go. Mma does it all the time.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> If you want to bank on a missed kick, good luck with that one. You know no one has said don't target the groin, they are just saying do it properly...first time.



on a real kick vs a pretend one. There are a lot of  reasons to be able to trust that kick. But the major one is my partner does not have to study acting


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i don't do tkd or karate  is this a tkd karate thread?
> 
> i can make up terminology as i go. Mma does it all the time.


now your just trolling you said something stupid got caught and you lost so now your trolling


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> now your just trolling you said something stupid got caught and you lost so now your trolling



rubbish. I am describing a kick. And doing it in a mma context. It doesn't matter what i call it.

so long as i can do it.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> rubbish. I am describing a kick. And doing it in a mma context. It doesn't matter what i call it.
> 
> so long as i can do it.


Except there is no such thing as a vertical round house but whatever everyone else knows your full of it even if you dont see it


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> i don't do tkd or karate  is this a tkd karate thread?
> 
> i can make up terminology as i go. Mma does it all the time.




MMA doesn't do it all the time. WE use terminology that is correct for the techniques, we may use the English translations of either Japanese, Korean, Thai or Portuguese but we don't make them up. Some techniques have more than one name but we still don't make them up. What would be the point of making names up?

K-man, pass the popcorn please, hope you have enough for all of us at this rate!


----------



## ballen0351

Tez3 said:


> MMA doesn't do it all the time. WE use terminology that is correct for the techniques, we may use the English translations of either Japanese, Korean, Thai or Portuguese but we don't make them up. Some techniques have more than one name but we still don't make them up. What would be the point of making names up?
> 
> K-man, pass the popcorn please, hope you have enough for all of us at this rate!


We need a Love it button


----------



## Dirty Dog

drop bear said:


> i can make up terminology as i go. Mma does it all the time.



This ranks in the Top Ten Stupidest Statements I've ever seen on MartialTalk...

Well, since we're going to just make up terminology as we go, I suggest that you arglebargle rumblestick belphro the attackers marblestump rottenbargle. And then you can tumescent rutabaga their wobbly rumple wattle.

That'll work. Every time.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> MMA doesn't do it all the time. WE use terminology that is correct for the techniques, we may use the English translations of either Japanese, Korean, Thai or Portuguese but we don't make them up. Some techniques have more than one name but we still don't make them up. What would be the point of making names up?
> 
> K-man, pass the popcorn please, hope you have enough for all of us at this rate!




really where did the term ground and pound come from?


----------



## Tez3

It's really quite simple, Hanzou and I might not agree on some things but we do know what each other is talking about. If he says get them in your guard then use rubber/butterfly guard I can agree or disagree because I know exactly what he means, if I say no, go for mount he knows what I mean, likewise with side control, figure four arm bar, RNC, scarf holds. posture up etc. Accepted names for each technique. Karate people can discuss kicks with TKD people because when I say side kick for example they know exactly what I mean even if they may execute it slightly differently. without this any discussion is pretty pointless because we are talking at odds with each other.
There is no different 'context' when talking about kicks in MMA, the kicks are the same, roundhouse, front, side, axe, hook, back etc They may be done a bit differently by each fighter depending on where they learnt it from but they are definitive kicks with definitive names.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> really where did the term ground and pound come from?



Sigh, it is the accepted name for an accepted technique, we don't all call it different things. Everything had to be named at one point be it thousands or hundreds of years ago, a few years ago or last week but we stick with one name we don't all call it different things.


----------



## Tez3

That's it for me, off to bed ( with popcorn and to watch 'Frozen', the one with that good song it....  _LET IT GO lol _) and see what the morning brings. Night everyone.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Sigh, it is the accepted name for an accepted technique, we don't all call it different things. Everything had to be named at one point be it thousands or hundreds of years ago, a few years ago or last week but we stick with one name we don't all call it different things.



if we are coming up with a new concept then it is pretty likely we will all call it different things untill it goes into common language.
our gym has names for drills that are us specific. Because we had to call it something.

you defining that kick as a miss. Was making up a name for it. Because as a concept it is new.

for me i don't care what you call that kick. I showed it can be done. And it works.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> It's really quite simple, Hanzou and I might not agree on some things but we do know what each other is talking about. If he says get them in your guard then use rubber/butterfly guard I can agree or disagree because I know exactly what he means, if I say no, go for mount he knows what I mean, likewise with side control, figure four arm bar, RNC, scarf holds. posture up etc. Accepted names for each technique. Karate people can discuss kicks with TKD people because when I say side kick for example they know exactly what I mean even if they may execute it slightly differently. without this any discussion is pretty pointless because we are talking at odds with each other.
> There is no different 'context' when talking about kicks in MMA, the kicks are the same, roundhouse, front, side, axe, hook, back etc They may be done a bit differently by each fighter depending on where they learnt it from but they are definitive kicks with definitive names.



john jones heel kick to the leg. Got  called an oblique kick. But the technique came first not the name. 

that kick only exists as a miss. But it works and so should be defined as something.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> MMA doesn't do it all the time. WE use terminology that is correct for the techniques, we may use the English translations of either Japanese, Korean, Thai or Portuguese but we don't make them up. Some techniques have more than one name but we still don't make them up. What would be the point of making names up?
> 
> K-man, pass the popcorn please, hope you have enough for all of us at this rate!








the abracadabra kick.

definitely not a made up name?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> john jones *heel kick to the leg*. Got  called an oblique kick. But the technique came first not the name.
> 
> that kick only exists as a miss. But it works and so should be defined as something.



That was a Ushiro Mawashigeri Gedan


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> for me i don't care what you call that kick. I showed it can be done. And it works.


You didnt show anything.  Please show a vertical roundhouse


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> the abracadabra kick.
> 
> definitely not a made up name?




It's Maegeri. slightly awkward but it's Maegeri Jodan.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> It's Maegeri. slightly awkward but it's Maegeri Jodan.



so another miss then 

superman punch?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> You didnt show anything.  Please show a vertical roundhouse



lol. This is what you originally asked for.

"How do you roundhouse someone in the groin standing in front of them?"

which we have seen can be done. Now you can dance around terminology all you want. But the kick works. It will work if you call it a vertical round house. Or an inner leg to the groin. Saying i came up with a silly name to describe is a pretty lame defence.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> so another miss then


not a miss it hit right where he was aiming with a front kick. He fakes a roundhouse to the leg and hit a front kick to the chest


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> so another miss then
> 
> superman punch?



Tobikomizuki.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> not a miss it hit right where he was aiming with a front kick. He fakes a roundhouse to the leg and hit a front kick to the chest



according to tez it is not a proper kick though. An awkward maegeri jodan. Becomes a fully functional abracadabra kick.

you may not like it but this is what mmaers do. And it works for us.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> lol. This is what you originally asked for.
> 
> "How do you roundhouse someone in the groin standing in front of them?"


They arenot standing infront they are off center and backing away with their body turned perpendicular to the person throwing the kick


> which we have seen can be done. Now you can dance around terminology all you want. But the kick works. It will work if you call it a vertical round house. Or an inner leg to the groin. Saying i came up with a silly name to describe is a pretty lame defence.


lol there is no such thing as a vertical roundhouse kick. Im not defending anything.  Im calling you at best misinformed at worst a lair about your experience.  Anyone that claims MMA fighters just make it up as they go along well im going for option 2 

SO im still waiting for this vertical roundhouse


----------



## tshadowchaser

how did we get from the OP to discussing if a kick has a made up name or what kick it is.  Start a diferent thread or go back to discussing the OP


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> according to tez it is not a proper kick though. An awkward maegeri jodan. Becomes a fully functional abracadabra kick.
> 
> you may not like it but this is what mmaers do. And it works for us.


Thats not what Tez said at all.  It does start off awkwardly but the kick is a front kick or Mae Geri


----------



## ballen0351

tshadowchaser said:


> how did we get from the OP to discussing if a kick has a made up name or what kick it is.  Start a diferent thread or go back to discussing the OP


Or lock this nonsense


----------



## tshadowchaser

agreed this thread has run its course


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> first one.


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> What's Japanese for 'vertical' because I want to put it with Mawashigeri.
> I already have Ushiro Mawashigeri, Ushiro Kingeri, Maegeri, Soto Mawashigeri, Fumikomi, Otoshigeri among others and I really want to add a _vertical_ Mawashigeri. I don't do Yokogeri very well these days, very powerful kick if you can do it though.


'Tate' ... as in tate tsuki, so perhaps tate mawashi geri. The Japanese will be spitting in their awamori!


----------



## K-man

This is a perfect example of a thread which could have a sensible discussion being hijacked by people with no knowledge pretending they know everything. God help me, vertical roundhouse kicks, you only need one kick,  don't react to simulated strikes. Do you guys really train at all?


----------



## Tez3

We cannot discuss any SD techniques or what will work if we don't understand what people mean because they make up names for techniques. I can't comment in whether 'xyz' will work if I don't know what it is. I can tell you whether a roundhouse kick can work as long as it is describing the roundhouse kick as martial artists know it though.
  A slightly awkward front kick is still a front kick, a clumsy or poorly executed front kick is still a front kick, it always will be.
'Us' MMAers don't change techniques and rename them, we adapt them certainly to allow us to use them to suit us but the technique is still the same. To allow me to get more leverage on a figure four arm bar I move a different way to the guys I train with but the technique remains the same technique. You cannot say well I went to do one kick but missed so I'm going to call the missed kick by a new name and say it works for something else. 
How can we discuss anything on that basis? We'll drive ourselves mad going in circles trying to understand which techniques are which.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> according to tez it is not a proper kick though. An awkward maegeri jodan. Becomes a fully functional abracadabra kick.
> 
> you may not like it but this is what mmaers do. And it works for us.


I didn't say that. It's still a front kick and it's not fully functional it's slightly awkward. It's more effective as a proper front kick without the messing at the beginning. It's not what 'MMAers' do it's what that one person did and in my opinion he's wrong, so no it doesn't work for us.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I didn't say that. It's still a front kick and it's not fully functional it's slightly awkward. It's more effective as a proper front kick without the messing at the beginning. It's not what 'MMAers' do it's what that one person did and in my opinion he's wrong, so no it doesn't work for us.



i am sorry i said mmaers do it. I found a ufc fighter who does it. You are welcome not to. Train however you like. But saying that you represent mma to a point where a ufc fighter is not allowed to be an example of mma.

is just a bit arrogant.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> They arenot standing infront they are off center and backing away with their body turned perpendicular to the person throwing the kick
> 
> lol there is no such thing as a vertical roundhouse kick. Im not defending anything.  Im calling you at best misinformed at worst a lair about your experience.  Anyone that claims MMA fighters just make it up as they go along well im going for option 2
> 
> SO im still waiting for this vertical roundhouse


i notice i have to prove things when you can appeal to authority. That is a double standard for evidence.

ok so i have found a mmaer who does make things up as he goes along. It is something we do. You have to live with that. Lets either re define the term or live with how i described it.

the kick has now been shown to work against resisting opponents against targets on the ground and to the groin. The only thing i haven't shown is that kick working against the inner leg.

so enough. You have taken your projections of what you do. To style bash what i do and insult me.

and you were wrong in your ignorance.

you would need to defend the effectiveness of your groin kick based on its own merits. And you haven't been able to do that. Instead making false accusations about me.


----------



## RTKDCMB

ballen0351 said:


> Ok Tony what's the appropriate response to a full force kick to the throat?


Ambulance.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> We'll drive ourselves mad going in circles trying to understand which techniques are which.



For some of us it's a short drive.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> but why kin geri when the roundhouse works beautifully?


If someone is standing right in front of you with their legs open then why would you want to do a roundhouse kick which would require you to move to a position where you are side on when you can just kick straight there with a front kick?

Don't you think that a direct upward strike to the dangly bits be more effective than hitting them from the side?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> i am sorry i said mmaers do it. I found a ufc fighter who does it. You are welcome not to. Train however you like. But saying that you represent mma to a point where a ufc fighter is not allowed to be an example of mma.
> 
> is just a bit arrogant.



What on earth are you talking about? You said a few times now, using bad grammar "us mmaers" meaning you think you represent all of us who do MMA. You told us an MMA fighter had made his own kick up and given it a 'magic' name. I pointed out it wasn't a made up kick at all but a front kick. So now you are upset. Well I can't help that.

It's been pointed out that this whole thread has gone past the point of hanging on and is well and truly snapped. It certainly has, I expected to wake up this morning to find the funeral service being read over it. Perhaps its epitaph should read ' a little knowledge is a dangerous thing'.
Rest in peace dear 'would this work' thread.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i notice i have to prove things when you can appeal to authority. That is a double standard for evidence.
> 
> ok so i have found a mmaer who does make things up as he goes along. It is something we do. You have to live with that. Lets either re define the term or live with how i described it.
> 
> the kick has now been shown to work against resisting opponents against targets on the ground and to the groin. The only thing i haven't shown is that kick working against the inner leg.
> 
> so enough. You have taken your projections of what you do. To style bash what i do and insult me.
> 
> and you were wrong in your ignorance.
> 
> you would need to defend the effectiveness of your groin kick based on its own merits. And you haven't been able to do that. Instead making false accusations about me.


I didn't style bash you.  You have no style.  You claim your allowed to make up things like vertical roundhouse kicks as you go along.  That's not a style that's fantasy land.  I also didn't insult you I wish I could but it's not allowed here.  There are lots of things I'd like to say to you but I'll get banned.  I'm convinced now however after the mmaer make things up as we go that you don't train in anything so your opinion holds zero value to me in this forum.  So have fun with your made up martial art and good day


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*Mod. Note. 

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Moderator-*


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> I didn't style bash you.  You have no style.  You claim your allowed to make up things like vertical roundhouse kicks as you go along.  That's not a style that's fantasy land.  I also didn't insult you I wish I could but it's not allowed here.  There are lots of things I'd like to say to you but I'll get banned.  I'm convinced now however after the mmaer make things up as we go that you don't train in anything so your opinion holds zero value to me in this forum.  So have fun with your made up martial art and good day




um......

you do know mma is a made up martial art. Don't you?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> um......
> 
> you do know mma is a made up martial art. Don't you?



Like Sinanju?


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Like Sinanju?



no. Because mma is tested against resistance. Which is what gives mma legitiimacy.


----------



## Chris Parker

No, it's not. MMA gets it's "legitimacy" from those lovely belts and purses you guys fight over… 

A little more seriously, there are many forms of "legitimacy" that can be applied to various martial arts, in a  range of contexts. Competition is one form, and really, that's all it is. Just one form. I'd also point out that training against what you are referring to as "resistance" is far from unique to MMA, and is hardly the litmus test for any form of "legitimacy", when all's said and done.


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> No, it's not. MMA gets it's "legitimacy" from those lovely belts and purses you guys fight over…
> 
> A little more seriously, there are many forms of "legitimacy" that can be applied to various martial arts, in a  range of contexts. Competition is one form, and really, that's all it is. Just one form. I'd also point out that training against what you are referring to as "resistance" is far from unique to MMA, and is hardly the litmus test for any form of "legitimacy", when all's said and done.



i have done a thread on it.


----------



## drop bear

Oh and google that martial art.

i did.


----------



## Chris Parker

drop bear said:


> i have done a thread on it.



Which, the "MMA is made up", one?



drop bear said:


> Oh and google that martial art.
> 
> i did.



No need to google it… it's very well known.


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> Which, the "MMA is made up", one?
> 
> 
> 
> No need to google it… it's very well known.



yes the mma made up one.

have you much experience with Sinanju?


----------



## Tez3

It's not 'made up' at all. It is exactly what it says it is mixed martial *arts*, the emphasis on the plural. It's a very simple idea of using different arts together in a competition. This means none of the techniques are new or made up but borrowed from various styles according to the preferences of the fighters. It's not a new concept by any means.
Does it have 'legitimacy'? Well I'm not sure anyone actually cares, those of us in it are busy training, coaching or whatever we do, people enjoy the fight nights whatever the level of fights so I'm not sure if anyone is bothered other than 'wannabes' really.
There is nothing new about MMA, there's only so many ways to kick and punch and even to grapple, people may adapt or tweak techniques to suit theirsize, shape weight etc but these techniques are as old as the hills. What is new is the way fights are promoted and publicised, they are 'sold' better than martial arts have been before. It's now a multi million dollar 'industry'.


----------



## Chris Parker

drop bear said:


> yes the mma made up one.



Okay… yeah, that entire thread is deeply flawed… MMA isn't "made up" (the way something like Sinanju is), it's an art in a constant state of development, through the crucible of competition. But I gotta say, nothing in that thread (well, your OP) is anything to do with "legitimacy"… hence my asking which thread… 



drop bear said:


> have you much experience with Sinanju?



You're kidding, right?


----------



## Tez3

If you talk to fighters it is far less about testing the 'art' and much more about testing themselves in the medium of MMA.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i am sorry i said mmaers do it. I found a ufc fighter who does it. You are welcome not to. Train however you like. But saying that you represent mma to a point where a ufc fighter is not allowed to be an example of mma.
> 
> is just a bit arrogant.


MMAers dont do it.  You found 1 guy that gave a silly name to a front kick.  He no more speaks for the MMA community then you do.
To claim MMAers just make crap up as they go is a bit silly


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> MMAers dont do it.  You found 1 guy that gave a silly name to a front kick.  He no more speaks for the MMA community then you do.
> To claim MMAers just make crap up as they go is a bit silly




I'm tending to think the guy calls it that because it's his 'magic' go to kick, his favourite one. I don't think he was actually naming it as such, I think drop bear has misunderstood. Most of us have a favourite techniques they like using, I like back fist a lot so I could well say to you this is _my_ 'magic' strike, not meaning I made it up or gave it that name but inferring it worked very well for me. Could be a bit too subtle thinking though lol


----------



## Tez3

and while I'm here .... discussing MMA techniques on a thread about self defence techniques is a little pointless really. In MMA we know our techniques will work, we know when and who we are fighting, we know they will not being trying to rape, rob or kill us, we have a referee to ensure fair play, we have no one to think about other than our opponent who we will have studied, we have a nice surface to fight on, appropriate clothing, gloves on our hands and we will have warmed up! we will even most likely get paid for fighting.
Need I say that is the complete opposite of a self defence situation? Where I will have to get a completely different head on...... say no more.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> I'm tending to think the guy calls it that because it's his 'magic' go to kick, his favourite one. I don't think he was actually naming it as such, I think drop bear has misunderstood. Most of us have a favourite techniques they like using, I like back fist a lot so I could well say to you this is _my_ 'magic' strike, not meaning I made it up or gave it that name but inferring it worked very well for me. Could be a bit too subtle thinking though lol



Yes. Using the magic works very well. Pretty much how I would personally use the term. Same as using wizard or what a spell binding punch etc.. No one could mistake that surely.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> and while I'm here .... discussing MMA techniques on a thread about self defence techniques is a little pointless really. In MMA we know our techniques will work, we know when and who we are fighting, we know they will not being trying to rape, rob or kill us, we have a referee to ensure fair play, we have no one to think about other than our opponent who we will have studied, we have a nice surface to fight on, appropriate clothing, gloves on our hands and we will have warmed up! we will even most likely get paid for fighting.
> Need I say that is the complete opposite of a self defence situation? Where I will have to get a completely different head on...... say no more.




see i have never found that to be the case. Either from personal experience or reports from others.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> see i have never found that to be the case. Either from personal experience or reports from others.



and there lies the problem.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> MMAers dont do it.  You found 1 guy that gave a silly name to a front kick.  He no more speaks for the MMA community then you do.
> To claim MMAers just make crap up as they go is a bit silly



i am impressed i found one guy as it is not that easy to do considering the task.

i think Greg Jackson does the same. But he trains john jones

i personally have found it the norm though and was backed up by at least one example. So you may be the exception here.

(and why am i the only guy who has to show evidence.)


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> and there lies the problem.



in my 20 years of being involved with violence.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i am impressed i found one guy as it is not that easy to do considering the task.
> 
> i think Greg Jackson does the same. But he trains john jones
> 
> i personally have found it the norm though and was backed up by at least one example. So you may be the exception here.


The norm where?  Ive been in several MMA gyms IVE NEVER heard people just make up stuff.  Ive always heard them show a technique then give credit to where it came from.


> (and why am i the only guy who has to show evidence.)


because you admit you just make stuff up as you go along so I dont believe anything you post


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> in my 20 years of being involved with violence.



There's so many things wrong with that I don't know where to start quite frankly so I'm not because there is no amount of words, common sense and sound martial arts knowledge from people who are far better than I is going to persuade you how wrong you are.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> The norm where?  Ive been in several MMA gyms IVE NEVER heard people just make up stuff.  Ive always heard them show a technique then give credit to where it came from.
> 
> because you admit you just make stuff up as you go along so I dont believe anything you post



you have lied on this thread though. I don't really care. But if we are honking on about it.

and i was describing something while trying to put it in context. That generally means making stuff up.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> you have lied on this thread though. I don't really care. But if we are honking on about it.


LOL ok


> and i was describing something while trying to put it in context. That generally means making stuff up.


No you were just flat wrong then when you got called out you said "MMAers make stuff up all the time".  Which is funny since all the other folks here that train in MMA said not so much.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> There's so many things wrong with that I don't know where to start quite frankly so I'm not because there is no amount of words, common sense and sound martial arts knowledge from people who are far better than I is going to persuade you how wrong you are.



look it is probably a discussion worthy of its own thread. But i could find at least hard industry guys from my end who are also sports fighters. 

i know of bad guy bikie enforcers who are sports fighters. It is defiantly a trend


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> LOL ok
> 
> No you were just flat wrong then when you got called out you said "MMAers make stuff up all the time".  Which is funny since all the other folks here that train in MMA said not so much.



one other. Lets be accurate.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> look it is probably a discussion worthy of its own thread. But i could find at least hard industry guys from my end who are also sports fighters.
> 
> *i know of bad guy bikie enforcers who are sports fighters. It is defiantly a trend*



I can imagine biscuit fighters are quite defiant.

_(in the UK biscuits, which Americans call cookies, are usually abbreviated to bikies/bickies)_


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> one other. Lets be accurate.


LOL no there were other


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> look it is probably a discussion worthy of its own thread. But i could find at least hard industry guys from my end who are also sports fighters.
> 
> i know of bad guy bikie enforcers who are sports fighters. It is defiantly a trend


You industry is shopping center security guard right?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> You industry is shopping center security guard right?



i worked a shopping center where a guy was set on fire in a fight.

but ok lets look at this. I made a statement you called me on it i provided evidence. Now you say that is not the case. Provide your own evidence.

i mean as fun as this is. (and i am having a ball) that is what it boils down to. 

because so far the only person who has supported a claim here has been me.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i worked a shopping center where a guy was set on fire in a fight.


Wow how horrifying did you call for help lol


> but ok lets look at this. I made a statement you called me on it i provided evidence. Now you say that is not the case. Provide your own evidence.
> 
> i mean as fun as this is. (and i am having a ball) that is what it boils down to.
> 
> because so far the only person who has supported a claim here has been me.


Supported what claim that you can make up names as you go?  No you haven't supported it at all


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I can imagine biscuit fighters are quite defiant.
> 
> _(in the UK biscuits, which Americans call cookies, are usually abbreviated to bikies/bickies)_




lol. 

one k or two in that. My spell check is not that good.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Wow how horrifying did you call for help lol
> 
> Supported what claim that you can make up names as you go?  No you haven't supported it at all



john jones does it. Hence the abracadabra kick. I posted the video.

now you didn't want to bother with things like credibility when you were your own external source. (not possible by the way)

then you want to shift the goal post and not believe people about their own experience.
and i went with that and provided an actual external source.

and now i am afraid it is back on youl


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> john jones does it. Hence the abracadabra kick. I posted the video.


Nope its a front kick he can sound like a fool and call it what he wants but its a front kick


> now you didn't want to bother with things like credibility when you were your own external source. (not possible by the way)


Its common knowledge to anyone that has a basic knowledge of martial arts.  I dont need to provide a source.  It just is.  


> then you want to shift the goal post and not believe people about their own experience


Nope not when they admit to making up as they go


> .
> and i went with that and provided an actual external source.


nope 1 guy proves nothing


> and now i am afraid it is back on youl


nope Go show your gym your amazing Vertical roundhouse and see what they think


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Nope its a front kick he can sound like a fool and call it what he wants but its a front kick
> 
> Its common knowledge to anyone that has a basic knowledge of martial arts.  I dont need to provide a source.  It just is.
> 
> Nope not when they admit to making up as they go
> 
> nope 1 guy proves nothing
> 
> nope Go show your gym your amazing Vertical roundhouse and see what they think



yep i really thought you would not be able to back up your position. 

but i tried.

anyway guy on fire fight. We called a bouncer called clay. Who was the resident hard guy of one of the security companies involved.

and coincidentally a martial artist.


----------



## ballen0351

There is nothing to back up.  Your wrong.  And what's a bouncer got to do with anything?  You claim experience in violence yet all you seem to have experience in is calling others to rescue you.


----------



## Hanzou

The abracadabra kick isn't a front kick, its a trick kick. Hence the name. Jon Jones doesn't look stupid calling the kick exactly what it is.


----------



## Transk53

ballen0351 said:


> And what's a* bouncer* got to do with anything?



Could you please not use that term!


----------



## ballen0351

Transk53 said:


> Could you please not use that term!


Why


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> The abracadabra kick isn't a front kick, its a trick kick. Hence the name. Jon Jones doesn't look stupid calling the kick exactly what it is.


LOL a trick kick huh

No he sets it up with 2 round house kicks to the leg then fakes a 3rd and switches to a front kic no magic or tricks involved but I have NO doubt you guy think its a "trick"  Hmm I learned that same set up 15 years ago fake a low roundhouse transition to a front kick who knew I was a magician


----------



## Transk53

ballen0351 said:


> Why



Why you ask. Okay, what is you're definition of a bouncer, some knuckle dragging monstrosity. No, we are Door Staff!


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> Why




A few years ago 'bouncer' had very bad connotations here. They were often just thugs employed to basically throw people out bodily/intimidate people and generally act like the criminals many of them were. Others and I know at least three, used being on the door to sell drugs, others took bribes from drug dealers to let them in. In a big effort to clear up this problem ( and it was a big problem) the government brought out licensing, mandatory training  badges and criminal checks, they also renamed 'bouncers' to 'door supervisors' which is supposed to describe their job. It has kept the worst off the doors in most places, the door supervisors are on the whole respectable and quite well trained. It's been going long enough that people now do think of them as door supervisors rather than bouncers. The system isn't infallible and has it's flaws but it has made the industry quite a lot more respected and controlled.


----------



## ballen0351

Transk53 said:


> Why you ask. Okay, what is you're definition of a bouncer, some knuckle dragging monstrosity. No, we are Door Staff!


I used the term bouncer because that's what dropb. Called him.  I was repeating what he called the guy.  I dislike bouncers or door staff so you don't really want my definition


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> A few years ago 'bouncer' had very bad connotations here. They were often just thugs employed to basically throw people out bodily/intimidate people and generally act like the criminals many of them were. Others and I know at least three, used being on the door to sell drugs, others took bribes from drug dealers to let them in. In a big effort to clear up this problem ( and it was a big problem) the government brought out licensing, mandatory training  badges and criminal checks, they also renamed 'bouncers' to 'door supervisors' which is supposed to describe their job. It has kept the worst off the doors in most places, the door supervisors are on the whole respectable and quite well trained. It's been going long enough that people now do think of them as door supervisors rather than bouncers. The system isn't infallible and has it's flaws but it has made the industry quite a lot more respected and controlled.



Yeah, I just get quite peeved at being described a bouncer. I never had to resort to unwarranted violence. I used to just walk them out, a fact I am quite proud of. Ballen please keep in mind, we are not all thugs, and I'll be dammed that I will not allow to see us such. Yeah we do what is necessary, but we are Door Staff!!


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> The abracadabra kick isn't a front kick, its a trick kick. Hence the name. Jon Jones doesn't look stupid calling the kick exactly what it is.




Sorry, it's not a trick kick, there's feints then a front kick. It's really quite obvious.


----------



## ballen0351

Transk53 said:


> Yeah, I just get quite peeved at being described a bouncer. I never had to resort to unwarranted violence. I used to just walk them out, a fact I am quite proud of. Ballen please keep in mind, we are not all thugs, and I'll be dammed that I will not allow to see us such. Yeah we do what is necessary, but we are Door Staff!!


Lol sure


----------



## Transk53

ballen0351 said:


> Lol sure



Aah right, this is some personal beef. You know what ballen, disagree all you like, I am not going to play you're game, cos I am already bored


----------



## ballen0351

Transk53 said:


> Aah right, this is some personal beef. You know what ballen, disagree all you like, I am not going to play you're game, cos I am already bored


No personal beef.  I was speaking to Drop bear.  Who is NOT in your country.  I was using a term HE used for HIS country.  So get over it. It's not all about you.


----------



## seasoned

Off the record, bouncer, doorman, cop, mall guard, whatever.... If you give someone a directive and they ignore you, blow you off, you would need to react, right?

Fast forward to MT. 

Guy's unofficially, cut the crap will ya..


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Sorry, it's not a trick kick, there's feints then a front kick. It's really quite obvious.



you said it was different to a normal front kick.

he was doing it wrong i believe.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> There is nothing to back up.  Your wrong.  And what's a bouncer got to do with anything?  You claim experience in violence yet all you seem to have experience in is calling others to rescue you.



yeah you say that. But you cant prove it. And well i did. 
mmaers do make up names for stuff. I mean if all you have is "yur wrong cos i said so" then you don't really understand the subject.

i have a ufc fighter with a made up name for a made up kick. Now i didn't invent the groin kick either. I don't pretend to. But i had to call it something. And like a credible ufc fighter john jones i made up a name.

i mean you were saying you cant hit that kick in the groin from the front. And i proved that wrong as well.

i imagine you will say "nah that's wrong cos no reason" as well.

i am not sure how you claim to be credible at all to be honest.

but you are fun.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> you said it was different to a normal front kick.
> 
> he was doing it wrong i believe.



Good grief man, for the second bloody time! I said it was an awkwardly done front kick, I didn't say it was different  nor did I say he was doing it wrong. Please go see someone and get a grip.


----------



## Transk53

seasoned said:


> Off the record, bouncer, doorman, cop, mall guard, whatever.... If you give someone a directive and they ignore you, blow you off, you would need to react, right?
> 
> Fast forward to MT.
> 
> Guy's unofficially, cut the crap will ya..



No worries


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I didn't say that. It's still a front kick and it's not fully functional it's slightly awkward. It's more effective as a proper front kick without the messing at the beginning. It's not what 'MMAers' do it's what that one person did and in my opinion he's wrong, so no it doesn't work for us.



..................................


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> i am not sure how you claim to be credible at all to be honest.
> 
> but you are fun.


Probably because I don't just "make it up" as I go.  But what ever buddy


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Probably because I don't just "make it up" as I go.  But what ever buddy



lol.you do. You just don't admit it.


----------



## Tez3

Drop bear, I think you delight in being obtuse, argumentative and winding people up, to be honest I think it's a despicable way to behave. I take it this is your idea of sparring as you said before, being full on and in your face. Well you can get out of mine because your boorish behaviour on here is reminiscent of the school playground and enoughs enough. Enjoy your games.


----------



## Transk53

ballen0351 said:


> No personal beef.  I was speaking to Drop bear.  Who is NOT in your country.  I was using a term HE used for HIS country.  So get over it. It's not all about you.



Who said it was, the intent had the same outcome. As such, I really have nothing to get over with ballen.


----------



## K-man

Transk53 said:


> Why you ask. Okay, what is you're definition of a bouncer, some knuckle dragging monstrosity. No, we are Door Staff!


I can understand where you are coming from but you are talking from an insider perspective. It will take many years to change the public perception, especially when even the Oxford dictionary defines 'bouncer' as 


> A person employed by a nightclub or similar establishment to prevent troublemakers and other unwanted people entering or to eject them from the premises.
> bouncer definition of bouncer in Oxford dictionary British World English


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Drop bear, I think you delight in being obtuse, argumentative and winding people up, to be honest I think it's a despicable way to behave. I take it this is your idea of sparring as you said before, being full on and in your face. Well you can get out of mine because your boorish behaviour on here is reminiscent of the school playground and enoughs enough. Enjoy your games.



how many pages have you been on this thread?
 How many posts have been argumentative or wind ups?

and now you try to pretend to be the adult.

you are sparring. And you are not even sparring fairly by constantly changing the goal posts.

this is just another tactic you are using to try to win.

see you are trying to have a discussion where your opinion matters and nobody else.s does. Disagree and suddenly i am despicable.

of course i am despicable. I mean if i don't just accept your opinion and defend mine. I must be a monster.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> I can imagine biscuit fighters are quite defiant.
> 
> _(in the UK biscuits, which Americans call cookies, are usually abbreviated to bikies/bickies)_


Gingerbread men?


----------



## Transk53

RTKDCMB said:


> Gingerbread men?



Not sure about that one. More of a cake really, than a biscuit.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> you are sparring. And you are not even sparring fairly by constantly changing the goal posts.
> 
> We've told you this before...conversations on here are not sparring.
> 
> this is just another tactic you are using to try to win.
> 
> I am not trying to WIN, this isn't sparring,
> 
> see you are trying to have a discussion where your opinion matters and nobody else.s does. Disagree and suddenly i am despicable.
> 
> I did not say you are despicable. Please read properly, I said it was a despicable way to behave, you are calling people liars, telling us you are making things up and doing what you are doing now, twisting words.
> 
> of course i am despicable. I mean if i don't just accept your opinion and defend mine. I must be a monster.




I repeat, I did not say you are despicable but the way you behave is. This isn't sparring, I know you think it is because you said so before, we don't 'pressure' test our posts by going up against others.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I repeat, I did not say you are despicable but the way you behave is. This isn't sparring, I know you think it is because you said so before, we don't 'pressure' test our posts by going up against others.



correct you don't pressure test or spar in conversation. You dictate terms methods and ideas to other people with the expectation that you can say what you want without discussion on it. It is your voice that counts. Your forum.your mma. Your terminology. Your experience that matters and so on.

and if having an opinion that is different to yours is despicable. Then you are the one that needs to work on that.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> correct you don't pressure test or spar in conversation. You dictate terms methods and ideas to other people with the expectation that you can say what you want without discussion on it. It is your voice that counts. Your forum.your mma. Your terminology. Your experience that matters and so on.
> 
> and if having an opinion that is different to yours is despicable. Then you are the one that needs to work on that.




Look, you are entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts. You have several times said you made things up, you have called a fellow poster a liar, you post things like the above which can only be to wind posters up. How do you expect us to think about the way you carry on here? No, please don't answer that, it is rhetorical. This thread is dead and continuing on it is necrophilia.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Look, you are entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts. You have several times said you made things up, you have called a fellow poster a liar, you post things like the above which can only be to wind posters up. How do you expect us to think about the way you carry on here? No, please don't answer that, it is rhetorical. This thread is dead and continuing on it is necrophilia.



see you don't even want a reply. And you claim you don't want a one sided conversation.


----------



## jks9199

Thread locked pending staff review.

jks9199
Adiminstrator


----------

