# Groin and Eyes Attacks.........Cheap shots?



## Cobra (Apr 20, 2004)

The groin and eye are our most sensitve areas. They can't be conditioned an it is very difficult to block such attacks. People call them cheap shots, but are they cheap shots or are all attacks valid?

I think they are cheap shots and should only be accessed if they is no other way. If I was to make a sport on fighting (like UFC or Pride) the only fouls I would make is attacking the groin or eyes is illegal. Other than that, all other stuff is legal.


----------



## MJS (Apr 20, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> The groin and eye are our most sensitve areas. They can't be conditioned an it is very difficult to block such attacks. People call them cheap shots, but are they cheap shots or are all attacks valid?



Well, let me start off by saying that I'm impressed by the topic of your thread.  I'm sure it'll generate some interesting replies.  I'm also impressed that it isnt another animal thread!!  Ok..back to the question.  IMO, they are not cheap shots.  Like anything you do in response to an attack, IMO, you should use as much force as whats being used against you.  If the attack warrants an eye jab then do it.  If it doesnt, then dont.



> I think they are cheap shots and should only be accessed if they is no other way. If I was to make a sport on fighting (like UFC or Pride) the only fouls I would make is attacking the groin or eyes is illegal. Other than that, all other stuff is legal.



Well, if you did start an event like Pride or UFC, I dont think you'd get much positive feedback.  What do I mean by that?  I honestly dont think that if you allowed things like biting and fish hooking, that any state wold allow that!  Another question for you.  You wouldnt allow a hit to the groin, but you'd allow biting????  A bite is much worse than a kick to the groin.

Mike


----------



## Cobra (Apr 20, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Well, let me start off by saying that I'm impressed by the topic of your thread. I'm sure it'll generate some interesting replies. I'm also impressed that it isnt another animal thread!! Ok..back to the question. IMO, they are not cheap shots. Like anything you do in response to an attack, IMO, you should use as much force as whats being used against you. If the attack warrants an eye jab then do it. If it doesnt, then dont.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like I said about the animal threads, I have only three of them compared to the 10 of other topics I have started thread about. 

And about bitting the groin, all attacks to the groin or eyes would be illegal including punching, kicking, sqeezing, scratching, or bitting the groin ore eye.

As far as bitting, I think it should be legal cause i would want it to be a battle between man and man meaing pure combat meaning everything goes (except for cheap shots like eye or groin attacks). Some martial arts teachbitting techniques and I wouldn't want to disadvantage those people. Bitting is anyway ineffective when up against a real martial artist. What is fish hooking?


----------



## MJS (Apr 20, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> Like I said about the animal threads, I have only three of them compared to the 10 of other topics I have started thread about.



Ok.



> And about bitting the groin, all attacks to the groin or eyes would be illegal including punching, kicking, sqeezing, scratching, or bitting the groin ore eye.



Ok.



> As far as bitting, I think it should be legal cause i would want it to be a battle between man and man meaing pure combat meaning everything goes (except for cheap shots like eye or groin attacks). Some martial arts teachbitting techniques and I wouldn't want to disadvantage those people. Bitting is anyway ineffective when up against a real martial artist. What is fish hooking?



Ok..let me get this straight because honestly it sounds pretty crazy.  You're saying that a groin shot is cheap but biting is not?? And why is that?  And FYI, how do you figure that biting is ineffective???  You say in your profile that you do BJJ.  If thats the case, then you should know that in the clinch, a bite can very easily be applied.  It can be applied in many grappling situations.  If you dont know which ones, then I suggest you check with your instructor.  What is fish hooking??? Taking your thumb and putting it in the corner of your opps. mouth and executing a pulling or tearing motion.  Again, if you are supposedly doing BJJ, you should really know that.

Mike


----------



## theletch1 (Apr 20, 2004)

Eye and groin shots are by no means cheap shots in a SD situation but I'd think they are a bit much for "friendly" competition.  As for biting being ineffective...my daughter has tapped me out several times with a good bite while we were fighting and she's only 12 years old.


----------



## Cobra (Apr 20, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Ok.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, it might be effective if you can keep it in for a long time, but people an escape from a bite. In any case, who bites? Wether effective not, people usally feel uncomfortable to bite so people wouldn't bite therefore making it useless to even bring up when discussing rules fighting. In a BJJ, it is easily escaple to get out of a bite (it is bad technique and and easliy be pulled away and be put in the triangle hold). But we have never talked about bitting BJJ.

By doing BJJ I should no fishhooking? Well for all the time I've been doing BJJ, they never talk about illegal moves like that.


----------



## Cobra (Apr 20, 2004)

theletch1 said:
			
		

> As for biting being ineffective...my daughter has tapped me out several times with a good bite while we were fighting and she's only 12 years old.


But if you know martial arts, heck even if you know martial arts, you should be able to escape a bite especially one done by a 12 year old child. No offense in anyway, but it would seam you might have a very weak pain threshold. Are you sure you didn't just let her win?


----------



## satans.barber (Apr 20, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> The groin and eye are our most sensitve areas. They can't be conditioned an it is very difficult to block such attacks. People call them cheap shots, but are they cheap shots or are all attacks valid?
> 
> I think they are cheap shots and should only be accessed if they is no other way. If I was to make a sport on fighting (like UFC or Pride) the only fouls I would make is attacking the groin or eyes is illegal. Other than that, all other stuff is legal.



Depends what you're training for...if you're on about competition then I'm sure bouts would last longer, be safer and more fun if these targets were illegal (you mention the UFC et al.).

If you're talking about training for self defence (this is the self defence forum after all) then you must consider ALL targets legal, and train to both attack them and defend your own.

At our club, we kick the groin /as often as possible/, to get students used to covering it up and defending it well. Any man knows that if you take a kick in the 'nads in a fight you're finished unless you're on drugs or some kinda psycho (or, indeed, a eunuch  ), and if course if you take an attack to the eyes you're going to be in as bad a situation.

Anyone who ignores these areas on the grounds of them being not very gentlemanly targets are deluding themlseves, and certainly in kenpo they should be focused on rather than ignored.

From an attack rather than a defence poit of view, these are also invaluable targets to teach women to strike when doing potential rape scenarios and things as well. Grim, but sadly necessary.

Ian.


----------



## Brother John (Apr 20, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> The groin and eye are our most sensitve areas. They can't be conditioned an it is very difficult to block such attacks. People call them cheap shots, but are they cheap shots or are all attacks valid?
> 
> I think they are cheap shots and should only be accessed if they is no other way. If I was to make a sport on fighting (like UFC or Pride) the only fouls I would make is attacking the groin or eyes is illegal. Other than that, all other stuff is legal.



These two areas are very sensitive, true.
#1: in the context of life or death combat...
NOTHING is "Cheap" in real combat. Survival is the word, and doing whatever it takes to persevere is the key. IF I need to, I'll grab hair, gouge eyes, crush throats, snap necks, break joints...etc. I'm not an "animal", but I've got a wife and two beautiful kids that are counting on me to either protect them and or make it home alive. As long as I do that, all else is appropriate.

#2: in the context of combative sport...
Making ONLY these two shots 'illegal' wouldn't work. What about the throat? What about the spine? The joints? No company would sponser or insure your 'event' with only these two areas prohibited.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Cobra (Apr 20, 2004)

Brother John said:
			
		

> These two areas are very sensitive, true.
> #2: in the context of combative sport...
> Making ONLY these two shots 'illegal' wouldn't work. What about the throat? What about the spine? The joints? No company would sponser or insure your 'event' with only these two areas prohibited.
> 
> ...


The spine and joints can be conditioned or blocked easier. And believe it or not, the throat can be conditioned or people could improve their throat protection (like shruggin the neck).

Another similar sport-like competion is the kumite which has no rules. I rather count on that as a true fighter chooser but if there is one thing that will make that most perfect determinar would be to attack the groin or eyes. In my opionion, those two attack should be the only thing banned in competion.


----------



## MA-Caver (Apr 20, 2004)

I've never gone into any type of formal/informal competition so I canna speak about the "fairness" of a groin/eye attack. 
But in the world outside the ring and dojos ... my oldest brother taught me this before I was into MA ... "...there's no such thing as a fair fight." I took that to heart and it's gotten me out of many a jam. If a person has me down (ground fighting) and is going to whomp the beejeezus out of me you bet your **** I'm gonna do what I can to get them up and OFF of me. If anything is within range of my teeth then you betcha. If I see an opportunity to gouge out their eyes you betcha. If I can connect knee, elbow, fist, to (their) groin you betcha! (the only thing I probably WON'T DO is bite the groin...  :erg: )I will utilize what MA training I have but I'll also utilize the street fighting methods I've learned as well. 
I realize that they may be construde as dirty fighting or whatever ... but "out-there" there are some attackers who - just- don't-care! They'll use whatever means at their disposal to come out ahead; a broken bottle, two-by-four, whatever! I see nothing wrong with utilizing the same tactics. A stay at the hospitial is just too dang expensive to let ethics and formalities get in the way of walking away from an altercation.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 20, 2004)

I think both the eyes and groin are effective targets, however, how many of us are ready to pull someones eye out and live with the fact that we blinded someone? You really have got to wonder what exactly your opponent did to deserve such a fate. Once you feel eye jiz all over your hand, are you going to jerk your hand away or continue "defending" your self?. 
By all means kick the guy in the groin, its not your fault he forgot to wear a cup :uhyeah: 
Sean :asian:


----------



## Brother John (Apr 21, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> The spine and joints can be conditioned or blocked easier. And believe it or not, the throat can be conditioned or people could improve their throat protection (like shruggin the neck).
> 
> Another similar sport-like competion is the kumite which has no rules. I rather count on that as a true fighter chooser but if there is one thing that will make that most perfect determinar would be to attack the groin or eyes. In my opionion, those two attack should be the only thing banned in competion.



No offense man, and this next line may offend you, but it's honest...
You have got to be kidding me! 


> the throat can be conditioned


No, it can't. The muscles of the neck, most notably the sternoclydomastoid muscles, can be strengthened/thickened to a great degree... but these muscles do not cover the throat. Even still, these muscles are highly succeptible to damage! The throat being the area between these two muscles.. it is the trachea covered by some flesh...nothing more. No bone, exceedingly little muscle to speak of (you have more muscle covering the back of your pinky-finger bones than you do this area)...so WHAT are you going to condition...and how??? 
I worked out with a guy (back in college) named Earnest who had been a college level wrestler, got a full ride scholarship just for wrestling. He had a black belt in Judo, had wrestled since he was a child and was...at the time I met him...seeking out some TKD skills to become a NHB fighter. He was also an avid bodybuilder who had been taking anabolic steriods for about two years (through various cycles and stacks). I bring up Earnest because he had the neck of a Brahma BULL! THICK, hard...etc. But his throat was still 100% suseptible to damage! During a boxing match he was punched in the throat...the fight was stopped and earnest was rushed by ambulance to the emergency room. 




> or people could improve their throat protection (like shruggin the neck).


This is a valid point, but one that works against your side of the argument as well. The eye are more mobile than the throat, and are a smaller target...plus something must pass into my field of vision for me to get struck in the eye(s)... but I can get struck in the throat from an obscure angle. THUS: the eyes are more easily protected than the throat. Just as a person could 'shrug' to 'improve' their throat protection... a person could shrug, dodge, bob, weave...block...to protect their eyes. 
Same goes for the groin. In my style (American Kenpo Karate) we practice standing and moving in such a way as to seriously limit our opponents access to our groin. There are ways to stand, ways to move, ways to block...etc. in order to protect the gonads. NOT TO MENTION A CUP!!! 



> The spine and joints can be conditioned or blocked easier


Again with the anatomy...
#1: how do you 'condition' your joints to withstand the torque of a well aplied twist/lock? The tendons the hold joints together can gain some flexibility, but NOT MUCH. If you were able to gain enough flexibility in a tendon in order to excape the damage of any one of a thousand different joint destruction techniques... you'd also have a joint that you couldn't keep in place and would slip constantly becuase the tendon wasn't tight enough to hold it there in it's appropriate ROM. Muscular resistance across a joint will only do so much too, and not enough. In all honesty there are joint manipulation techniques in which you want them to use all of their muscular strength...as it adds to their own pain and damage.
#2: how do you block a shot to your spine? A person doesn't have to be directly behind you to target and access your spine. Unless your arms swivel ALL the way around in their sockets and you can see directly behind you as well as you can to the front (not an owl are we?) then any Human is at a marked disadvantage to block a shot to the spine.
Dont let them get back there? Good idea! Doesn't always work like that. Fightings like that. 
Back to the anatomy:
There are scant few muscles that cover the spine... at most the erector spinea cross it...a bit. There's no padding other than the very sensitive bone ridges built into your vertebrae...and if one of these ridges breaks (easier to do than you'd think) you are in a WORLD of hurt. WAY worse than any full on kick to the testes would ever give you!!!!!!

Now on to my favorite: The Kumite!



> Another similar sport-like competion is the kumite which has no rules. I rather count on that as a true fighter chooser


And Nessie would make a nice aquarium pet.
Are you actually saying that you believe in the fictional competition in "Blood Sport"...that VanDumb movie?
It  was  a  story.
Not real, not true. 
Try this one little tidbit. 
In the movie, and according the Frank Dux (the real man, with lots of TALL tales) the "Kumite" is an ancient event in China, promulgated by the Black Triad (AKA: the Tongs, Chinese mafia). This competition is called "The Kumite". YET "Kumite" is a Japanese word indicating a fight, and really wasn't even used by them until the last 170 or so years.
ODD..
Ancient Chinese competition with a modern Japanese name. :uhyeah: 
Doesn't work.

Listen... I'm coming off very badly, I know. Please don't be too upset with me. I just find some of your reasoning....
wanting.
I really should get more sleep.
Helps me be less pissy..

Your Brother
John


----------



## 8253 (Apr 21, 2004)

every body part is open to attack during a physical altercation


----------



## Tony (Apr 21, 2004)

I don't think you can afford to be nice when your life is in danger! I would attack the groin, eyes, throat and any other area, and even bite my way out!


----------



## 7starmantis (Apr 21, 2004)

I'm not completely convinced that Cobra's posts are legit, they seem to full of faulty reasoning and lean towards trollish behavior, but I'll assume he is completely serious.

How is it that the groin is a hard target to defend? There are a myriad of things you can do to protect your groin. I see that you train simply for sport so that explains your reasoning, but in a real self defense situation your being stupid if you try and keep yourself from attacking some "cheap" target. Cheap is being attacked by a mugger with a knife coming home from the grocery store, in which case I'm free to use any technique I find effective. There is "iron crotch" dedicated to conditioning the groin. I'm not atesting to its validity, but you said you couldn't condition it....there are those who do. I can't reply to the starting a sport event as I do not train for anything except pure self defense, but it seems Cobra is a little off in his reasoning. If you allow certain technique to be removed from your fighting than you put yourself at a disadvantage, this is stupid to do if truly defending your life.

7sm


----------



## MJS (Apr 21, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> Well, it might be effective if you can keep it in for a long time, but people an escape from a bite. In any case, who bites? Wether effective not, people usally feel uncomfortable to bite so people wouldn't bite therefore making it useless to even bring up when discussing rules fighting. In a BJJ, it is easily escaple to get out of a bite (it is bad technique and and easliy be pulled away and be put in the triangle hold). But we have never talked about bitting BJJ.



Easy to get out of?? LOL, dude, if you take a look at Paul Vunak, he teaches an art called Kino Mutai.  There is an entire art to biting, and its much more complex that you would think.  My FMA teacher has gone over this with me on a few occasions.  As for the triangle....first, you need to be in the right position for that choke.  Second, a bite can be applied in the clinch.  Again, I suggest you check with your inst.



> By doing BJJ I should no fishhooking? Well for all the time I've been doing BJJ, they never talk about illegal moves like that.



Well, seeing as how youve done BJJ and wrestling you should KNOW about that.  So you're saying that your inst. does not talk about what moves are illegal?? Wow.  If you've done any competing, I'm sure that they have a list of do's and dont's.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Apr 21, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> But if you know martial arts, heck even if you know martial arts, you should be able to escape a bite especially one done by a 12 year old child. No offense in anyway, but it would seam you might have a very weak pain threshold. Are you sure you didn't just let her win?



Dude, its very apparent that you SEEM to not have a clue about biting.  Seeing as how you're so into animals, why is it then, so hard to pull away from a dog biting you?  

Mike


----------



## MJS (Apr 21, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> The spine and joints can be conditioned or blocked easier. And believe it or not, the throat can be conditioned or people could improve their throat protection (like shruggin the neck).



Yeah, ok.  And I have a bridge that I can sell you real cheap too!! LOL!  The throat can be conditioned?? Ok.




> Another similar sport-like competion is the kumite which has no rules. I rather count on that as a true fighter chooser but if there is one thing that will make that most perfect determinar would be to attack the groin or eyes. In my opionion, those two attack should be the only thing banned in competion.



Ok.


----------



## MJS (Apr 21, 2004)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> I'm not completely convinced that Cobra's posts are legit, they seem to full of faulty reasoning and lean towards trollish behavior, but I'll assume he is completely serious.



I'm glad that I'm not the only one that thinks there is a troll lurking here!!  For someone who claims to have all of this fighting knowledge, he cetainly does not show it.



> How is it that the groin is a hard target to defend? There are a myriad of things you can do to protect your groin. I see that you train simply for sport so that explains your reasoning, but in a real self defense situation your being stupid if you try and keep yourself from attacking some "cheap" target. Cheap is being attacked by a mugger with a knife coming home from the grocery store, in which case I'm free to use any technique I find effective. There is "iron crotch" dedicated to conditioning the groin. I'm not atesting to its validity, but you said you couldn't condition it....there are those who do. I can't reply to the starting a sport event as I do not train for anything except pure self defense, but it seems Cobra is a little off in his reasoning. If you allow certain technique to be removed from your fighting than you put yourself at a disadvantage, this is stupid to do if truly defending your life.



7sm---I agree 100% with the above.

Mike


----------



## loki09789 (Apr 21, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> Well, it might be effective if you can keep it in for a long time, but people an escape from a bite. In any case, who bites? Wether effective not, people usally feel uncomfortable to bite so people wouldn't bite therefore making it useless to even bring up when discussing rules fighting. In a BJJ, it is easily escaple to get out of a bite (it is bad technique and and easliy be pulled away and be put in the triangle hold). But we have never talked about bitting BJJ.
> 
> By doing BJJ I should no fishhooking? Well for all the time I've been doing BJJ, they never talk about illegal moves like that.



I bite and a fish hook is simply a hooking palm strike (as far as I know) into a guys head (standard practice, not an illegal move by any means) around straight arms.  I learned that from a guy who was a High School Wrestler.  

In playful 'reality' sparring where anything goes, but the intensity and power is reduced, I have bitten and believe me, they do not try and get away because it only makes it worse.  Ask Tyson if biting works and the cost of pulling away from a bite.


----------



## Brother John (Apr 21, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Second, a bite can be applied in the clinch.  Again, I suggest you check with your inst.
> Mike


OR...
you could check with Mike Tyson.
 :lookie: 
Your Brother
John


----------



## MJS (Apr 21, 2004)

Brother John said:
			
		

> OR...
> you could check with Mike Tyson.
> :lookie:
> Your Brother
> John



LOL!! Right on Brother!!!!  And maybe even check with Evander.  

Mike


----------



## Brother John (Apr 21, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> I bite and a fish hook is simply a hooking palm strike (as far as I know) into a guys head (standard practice, not an illegal move by any means) around straight arms.  I learned that from a guy who was a High School Wrestler.


No. Maybe that's what your wrestling friend called a "fish-hook", but that's not the common understanding. A fish-hook technique is usually any technique that uses the fingers or thumbs (multiple or singular) that 'hooks' the cheek(s) and yanks them back in order to rip the flesh of the cheeks.
Very painful!!!!!
Very damaging.
That's what we're discussing here.
Your Brother
John


----------



## loki09789 (Apr 21, 2004)

Brother John said:
			
		

> No. Maybe that's what your wrestling friend called a "fish-hook", but that's not the common understanding. A fish-hook technique is usually any technique that uses the fingers or thumbs (multiple or singular) that 'hooks' the cheek(s) and yanks them back in order to rip the flesh of the cheeks.
> Very painful!!!!!
> Very damaging.
> That's what we're discussing here.
> ...



Okay... that sounds worse than the palm strike.  OUCH!  I think the point that this brings up is that martial terminology tends to be in house usage, and the description of the technique can be more useful at times.  Thanks for the info on the BJJ use of the term.


----------



## Cobra (Apr 21, 2004)

First off I would like to say, to MJS. It seams every thread I write you are trying to compete with me or something. You like saying my threads are bad, or saying I know nothing about martial arts. I'm pretty new to this site so I'm not sure, but are you like that to everybody? Who knows, I might of learned of fishooking back in the days I started MA, but maybe I don't remember. Or maybe, our sensei or coach has enough faith in us not to do llegal stuff like that. Who knows, does it really matter so much wether I know that or not? I mean damn, kill me why don't for not knowing that. Who would do something like fishooking? Like doing a hand choke, it seams not right, right off the bat.

Anyway, back to the topic. What I obviosly meant was you can improve your throat block. We have been taught to do that. In any case, people must adapt to the situation. And about the kumite. It would be cool to have a competion like that is what I meant. No rules, no crap, real fight! I just think it would of been cool to add the banning of groin and eye attaks since I think they are cheap shots. But then everybody brings in every damn rule that exsist likes spine, joint, or whatever. First off I would like to say is that with that many rules, is it a true fight. Maybe a couple rules is okay, but if you look at UFC or Pride, they have a whole library of rules. They should make UFC like it was in the 90's, I heard there was a lot less rules.

And to 7starmantis, first off what I meant was in a sport situation. Have I talked once in this whole thing that I wouldn't try to use every advantage I would in a defense situation. Heck, if I was in a street corner and some crazy f***er tried to physically assualt me, I would use the nearest weapon instead of my own body like a thrown away baseball bat or something. It would actually be dumb to just fight him, he could have a gang around him. 

And the whole thing around bitting. Bitting damn hurts! It hurts more than someone trying squeeze whatever you bite. True, it is more painful than normal. But in my opionion, people can escape it! For example, if someone jumps up on someone and starts to bite their forehead, it will hurt more, maybe even more than hard punch. It may make you bleed or tear flesh, but it doesn't mean you would get out of it. Grab his neck or punch him in the gut a few times, then he will be wailing in pain more than you. Why do I believe so firmly one this? I've have been attacked by some crazy f***ers. And that is all I am going to say about that. I have never been attaked in the groin, but gottin hit there. And let me tell you, it hurts way more than a bite!

Comming down to it. It maybe would just be better if they make a fighting contest with NO RULES.


----------



## MJS (Apr 21, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> First off I would like to say, to MJS. It seams every thread I write you are trying to compete with me or something. You like saying my threads are bad, or saying I know nothing about martial arts. I'm pretty new to this site so I'm not sure, but are you like that to everybody? Who knows, I might of learned of fishooking back in the days I started MA, but maybe I don't remember. Or maybe, our sensei or coach has enough faith in us not to do llegal stuff like that. Who knows, does it really matter so much wether I know that or not? I mean damn, kill me why don't for not knowing that. Who would do something like fishooking? Like doing a hand choke, it seams not right, right off the bat.



Dude, let me explain something to you.  If you refer to the post that Paul made, that is probably one of the biggest reasons you get the arguments you do from me.  You come on here, make these crazy threads and statements..Dude, what do you expect???  You claim to have all this experience, but you fail to back it up with anything credible.  As for competeing with you..LOL..come on man.  Trust me, thats not the case, even though it may SEEM that way to you.  Yes, you are new to this site.  I've been here for quite a while, and there are some very skilled people here, and there are some whos post, skills, etc. that we question.  As for fighting dirty...let me tell you something...in a life and death situation, fighting dirty is the best way to survive.  Be it a fish hook, eye jab, groin kick, etc. if its there and presents itself, then I'd use it.  Why not use it??  Do you not think that if someone was attacking you, that they themselves wouldnt try to do a dirty move? Of course they would.



> Anyway, back to the topic. What I obviosly meant was you can improve your throat block. We have been taught to do that. In any case, people must adapt to the situation. And about the kumite. It would be cool to have a competion like that is what I meant. No rules, no crap, real fight! I just think it would of been cool to add the banning of groin and eye attaks since I think they are cheap shots. But then everybody brings in every damn rule that exsist likes spine, joint, or whatever. First off I would like to say is that with that many rules, is it a true fight. Maybe a couple rules is okay, but if you look at UFC or Pride, they have a whole library of rules. They should make UFC like it was in the 90's, I heard there was a lot less rules.



There will never be a legal fighting competition like you say.  If that is what you're looking for, then why dont you just go to the local bar, and start a fight if you want to do some eye jabs and groin kicks.  As for the throat...as it was said before, the neck can be conditioned, but there is no way that anyone can take a hit to the throat like that.  Even an improperly applied choke can do some serious damage.  Didnt your Inst. teach you about that???  Keep in mind, when talking about the UFC/ Pride events...its no longer NHB fighting.  Its MMA.  Its a sport dude, thats it!  Its much closer to a real fight than you'll ever see in any martial arts school.  In the 90s there were less rules, but do to the politicians, who at one time, had those events pulled from PPV, the rules were added to bring those events back.



> And the whole thing around bitting. Bitting damn hurts! It hurts more than someone trying squeeze whatever you bite. True, it is more painful than normal. But in my opionion, people can escape it! For example, if someone jumps up on someone and starts to bite their forehead, it will hurt more, maybe even more than hard punch. It may make you bleed or tear flesh, but it doesn't mean you would get out of it. Grab his neck or punch him in the gut a few times, then he will be wailing in pain more than you. Why do I believe so firmly one this? I've have been attacked by some crazy f***ers. And that is all I am going to say about that. I have never been attaked in the groin, but gottin hit there. And let me tell you, it hurts way more than a bite!



If you think you can escape from a bite, good for you.  I'm simply saying that its harder than you think.  If its so easy to escape from a bite, take a look at the Tyson/Holyfield incident.  Holyfield was too busy jumping up and down to even think about doing anything else.  Hmm...must be that biting took quite a toll on him.



> Comming down to it. It maybe would just be better if they make a fighting contest with NO RULES.



Dude, if thats what you want, then go out and start a fight with someone on the street.  Then you'll have your no rules event.

Mike


----------



## Cobra (Apr 21, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> As for fighting dirty...let me tell you something...in a life and death situation, fighting dirty is the best way to survive. Be it a fish hook, eye jab, groin kick, etc. if its there and presents itself, then I'd use it. Why not use it?? Do you not think that if someone was attacking you, that they themselves wouldnt try to do a dirty move? Of course they would.
> 
> Dude, if thats what you want, then go out and start a fight with someone on the street. Then you'll have your no rules event.
> 
> Mike


That is exactly what I told 7starmantis if you read the whole post. Of coarse in a real street fight you would go for those areas. It would actually be better to find a wacking weopon in that situation.

And as far as competion goes. I mean a organization that supports a no rules competion.. If you go into a street, anything oes, even guns! Have you seen the movie Bloodsport? That competion they do which is no rules would be nice. I know the kumite is fiction, or so some people say, I'm sure that there are secret competions like that held. Or maybe not, who knows.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Apr 21, 2004)

Brother John said:
			
		

> No offense man, and this next line may offend you, but it's honest...
> You have got to be kidding me!
> 
> No, it can't. The muscles of the neck, most notably the sternoclydomastoid muscles, can be strengthened/thickened to a great degree... but these muscles do not cover the throat. Even still, these muscles are highly succeptible to damage! The throat being the area between these two muscles.. it is the trachea covered by some flesh...nothing more. No bone, exceedingly little muscle to speak of (you have more muscle covering the back of your pinky-finger bones than you do this area)...so WHAT are you going to condition...and how???
> ...



I was going to cut this post apart and reply to the parts I liked. I found that I should just keep it intact.
 :asian:


----------



## blackbelt4me (Apr 21, 2004)

i really did not read all the post`s but i will say this my master tells us out side street fighting anything goes
     including eyes groin   anything
    "when your opponent comes,greet him at once,if he withdraws,immediately send him on his way"
    :asian:


----------



## Cruentus (Apr 21, 2004)

I'll keep this brief.

For an example of some serious "NHB" fighting, look at our Bare Knuckle Boxing Traditions. I'm Talking London Prize Ring Rules and before to Broughton rules, and before to no rules.

There was a time when people "prize fought" without rules period. All kinds of nasty stuff was allowed, and groin grabs and eye pokes weren't the only things to worry about. THey had to worry about a whole host of problems such as kicks with spiked boots, skin grabs, fish-hooks (not just hooking the mouth, but eyes and even ears could be "hooked" finger and joint manipulation, the clinch and grappling, and the list goes on.

And, do you know what happened? People died. That was initially why the Broughton rules were developed. We will never go back to the no rules days because of it. But, if we read about and learn about how these people fought, we may be able to take with us how to handle our competition skills outside the ring.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread is, or why it was started. But, hopefully I gave good input on what seems like a pretty pointless, degenerated thread.

A side note, yall might want to read up on this as well, as I think it may apply here:
http://www.themartialist.com/pecom/vtg.htm

Thank you,
PAUL


----------



## Brother John (Apr 21, 2004)

PAUL said:
			
		

> THey had to worry about a whole host of problems such as kicks with spiked boots, skin grabs, fish-hooks (not just hooking the mouth, but eyes and even ears could be "hooked" finger and joint manipulation, the clinch and grappling, and the list goes on.
> PAUL



...yeah//
I heard that the titty-twisters were hell.

Your Brother
"Ow...leggo...leggooooo....."
John


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> That is exactly what I told 7starmantis if you read the whole post. Of coarse in a real street fight you would go for those areas. It would actually be better to find a wacking weopon in that situation.



But didnt you say that those were cheap shots??



> And as far as competion goes. I mean a organization that supports a no rules competion.. If you go into a street, anything oes, even guns! Have you seen the movie Bloodsport? That competion they do which is no rules would be nice. I know the kumite is fiction, or so some people say, I'm sure that there are secret competions like that held. Or maybe not, who knows.



Regardless of if those events are real or not, what matters is, is that I really dont think that any org. will take the chance of having someone die at these events.  

Mike


----------



## 7starmantis (Apr 22, 2004)

Cobra,
  I remember when I was a kid I wanted to see no rules fighting as well. Now that I've been in some san shou and full contact fighting I don't see the point of it. First off, I don't really see why anyone would train only for competition, but thats a different thread I guess. Why would you want to see someone getting their elbow or knee broken? Why would you want to step into a ring and crush someones throat? Would you want to be in a ring with a 275 pound full contact fighter trying to kill you or at least brake a few bones?

One question for you, Have you done any full contact fighting?

7sm


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Cobra,
> One question for you, Have you done any full contact fighting?



Interesting question 7sm!  In fact, I'm beginning to question his ENTIRE martial arts background.  Does he even have one????????

Mike


----------



## loki09789 (Apr 22, 2004)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Cobra,
> I remember when I was a kid I wanted to see no rules fighting as well. Now that I've been in some san shou and full contact fighting I don't see the point of it. First off, I don't really see why anyone would train only for competition, but thats a different thread I guess. Why would you want to see someone getting their elbow or knee broken? Why would you want to step into a ring and crush someones throat? Would you want to be in a ring with a 275 pound full contact fighter trying to kill you or at least brake a few bones?
> 
> One question for you, Have you done any full contact fighting?
> ...



Along those lines, why would you want to even try and ENSURE such an event as a promoter?  What audience would you try and promote the event too?  Do you have the money set aside to pay for civil lawyers to defend your 'right' to show this stuff when the protesters hit?

Come on, there are people banning boxing even today - and, as Paul pointed out, it is much 'nicer' than it has been in the past (maybe not less corrupt...).


----------



## OULobo (Apr 22, 2004)

So I'm thinking a few things to throw out here. 

First the biting thing, what Cobra is missing is that the damage from a bite is not from pain or clamping, it's from bulk tissue loss, tendon/soft tissue damage, blood loss and most of all infection. The jaw is an unbelievabley strong joint, but the strength isn't what makes it a good weapon. If a person is biting it is either an attack of opportunity, a distraction, a vital area attack, or a disabling attack. It's hard to hold a knife or clench a fist if your forarm tendons are severed. Anyone who bites boney or thin muscled areas is not attacking efficiently. 

On to the other targets mentioned. I always hear from police that the areas of attack if in desperate situations are eyes, throat, plexis, groin and knees.

I don't usually attack the plexis, or knees because I have come across too many hardasses and muscleheads that are pretty damn resistant to these attacks. 

If I am serious, I love attacking eyes. People are generally heavily dependant on sight so eyes are great targets. They also show suprisingly good ability to recover from damage. Eyes aren't the easiest target to hit. The are often recessed into the orbital and can be insulated by layers of muscle and skin when tightly shut. 

I also love the throat. It's a classic target for multiple reasons; the large vein and artery are accessable for chokes, slashes and disruption from shock; the trachea is available for collapse form strike and constrictions in a hold; and there are numerous pressure/pain points and nerve targets. The only negative is coverage from shoulder hunching, chin dropping, large traps, ect. 

Finally the groin. It's a valid target and I have seen whole systems designed around attacking the groin. The only problems I have are that it is a pain centered target and it can be pretty easily defended. I was talking to an officer once that told a story about a guy who was choking his brother in a domestic violence call. The guy doing the choking was livid. The officers restrained him and took him to the jail for booking. About the 20 mins. after they arrived, the attacker who was previously upright, heathy, calm and talkative, collapsed on the ground vomiting, moaning and holding his stomache. The officers took him to the hospital down the road and after about 30min. the M.D. returned and began questioning the officers about their restraining tactics. The officers offered that they only applied an arm bar and then cuffs. The M.D. then told them that the attacker had two fully ascended testicles and he may loose them both from tissue damage. The officers questioned the victim and found out that the whole time he was being choked he was hammering his knee into the attacker's groin. His estimate was that he struck about 20 times. In his rage the attacker felt none of these strikes and continued his offense. So just how effective is a groin strike?


----------



## c2kenpo (Apr 22, 2004)

First I agree with many of the posters on this one. MJS, Paul, 7Star.

Cobra, your threads are starting to become "matchsticks" and some of your statements do give people reason to question your thinking and training background.

I have been in 3 FIGHTS in my life, and several competions, along with sports etc. Each fight ended in a matter of seconds due to strikes to the "SOFT" target areas or a simple matter of avoidance.
In sport competitions I have watched many fighters go down even with protective gear on due to a well placed hit or accidental blow to a soft target. I to have gone down to an accidental hit to the throat and I was checking at the time. 
For sporting events take a look at all different sports and look at the injuires and how the people reacted to some of those. (The Tyson / Hollyfield match is a great example!)

I have trained in MA for over 7 years now. Have been an avid watcher of boxing and sporting events and am also certified in First Aid and CPR and have been a lifeguard and college sports player. 
My belief is that soft targets no matter what claim that there is CANNOT be trained or toughend (Barring extreme surgery or / Drugs that block the transmission of neurons to the brain that regulate pain).

Pinching, biting all of those "small" things ARE PROVEN METHODS of self-defense and are taught worldwide and most professional law enforment and secuity personnell will agree with me on that.
I help teach a women's self-defense class that focuses on pinching, I would rather be and Ukei or Body for ANY Martial Artist / Boxer for 24 hrs straight then do a 2 hr seminar. WHY? BECAUSE IT WORKS. The human nervous system is the same for everyone they will react no matter what barring my previous stement before drugs and surgery.

For a true test of a fighters skill I don't measure it by how tough they are or if they can break so many bones or can survive a cage match. 

I measure it by how many times they have not gotten into a fight. The mind is more powerful then any fist.

Please choose your threads more carefuly and be prepared to give a reason for your statements so that they just don't look like a "firestarter"

JMHO.

Forgive me if I have stepped on any toes here.

Dave


----------



## loki09789 (Apr 22, 2004)

OULobo said:
			
		

> So I'm thinking a few things to throw out here.
> 
> First the biting thing, what Cobra is missing is that the damage from a bite is not from pain or clamping, it's from bulk tissue loss, tendon/soft tissue damage, blood loss and most of all infection. The jaw is an unbelievabley strong joint, but the strength isn't what makes it a good weapon. If a person is biting it is either an attack of opportunity, a distraction, a vital area attack, or a disabling attack. It's hard to hold a knife or clench a fist if your forarm tendons are severed. Anyone who bites boney or thin muscled areas is not attacking efficiently.
> 
> ...



Don't discount the psychological impact of how these areas are usually consciously/subconciously reserved for intimate access only.  The psychological invasion of that personal space, especially violently ('my throat, I can't breath  - self fulfilled prophecy will create a muscle contraction that doesn't need to happen).  Look at the defensive posture of most animals, they cover and screen the very targets you are identifying.  As humans, we do this as well, BUT we also are conscious of it and can/do psych ourselves up and out with what will happen if we get nailed in these areas.

Similar to the guy who takes a grazing shot, but is convinced that gunshot always kill and wills himself into shock and death because of that self fulfilled prophecy.


----------



## c2kenpo (Apr 22, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Don't discount the psychological impact of how these areas are usually consciously/subconciously reserved for intimate access only.  The psychological invasion of that personal space, especially violently ('my throat, I can't breath  - self fulfilled prophecy will create a muscle contraction that doesn't need to happen).  Look at the defensive posture of most animals, they cover and screen the very targets you are identifying.  As humans, we do this as well, BUT we also are conscious of it and can/do psych ourselves up and out with what will happen if we get nailed in these areas.
> 
> Similar to the guy who takes a grazing shot, but is convinced that gunshot always kill and wills himself into shock and death because of that self fulfilled prophecy.




DONE!! The best example is the chair when you were in school and rocking back and forth. How your body would tense up if you felt like you would fall. All called the nervous condition that we put up our hands to protect our eyes, we turn our hips and try to cover our groin, and we are terrified of suffocation, all creation a mental / physical reaction.

Sir i couldn't have siad it better.

Dave


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

To C2Kenpo and Loki-

Those two posts were EXCELLENT!!!! :asian: Many VERY good points were brought up.

Thank you.

Mike


----------



## c2kenpo (Apr 22, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> To C2Kenpo and Loki-
> 
> Those two posts were EXCELLENT!!!! :asian: Many VERY good points were brought up.
> 
> ...



Takes a bow  :asian: 

Mike, 

Take a bow for yourself. You are the one who made the first postive marks on this thread. I think the thread is a valid question but we need it in perspective. 

Deep Blue Sea ~ L.L. Cool J.

"Everything is relative. Get your hands on a hot woman the moment goes by like that. Get your hands on a hot oven seems like forever."

Dave


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

c2kenpo said:
			
		

> Takes a bow  :asian:
> 
> Mike,
> 
> ...



Thank you sir.

Mike


----------



## Cobra (Apr 22, 2004)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Cobra,
> I remember when I was a kid I wanted to see no rules fighting as well. Now that I've been in some san shou and full contact fighting I don't see the point of it. First off, I don't really see why anyone would train only for competition, but thats a different thread I guess. Why would you want to see someone getting their elbow or knee broken? Why would you want to step into a ring and crush someones throat? Would you want to be in a ring with a 275 pound full contact fighter trying to kill you or at least brake a few bones?
> 
> One question for you, Have you done any full contact fighting?
> ...


When I mean full contact, it doesn't mean it has to be a fight to the death. There would be determining factors on who would win.
Have I done full contact fighting? Not as a sport, but when I was younger, I used to get into many fights (before I started martial arts of coarse).

MJS, could you politely tell me why you doubt I have any martial arts experiance? Surely it isn't because I didn't know what fishooking meant? What have I shown to you to think that I don't have any experiance in Martial Arts? I'm no black belt yet, is that what kind of experiance you mean?

And MJS, why don't you make peace? Why is it every damn posts I write, you are there to criticize me? Is that your life, criticizing people who you don't like? Do you have many friends? Honestly, what joy do you have in criticizing everything I say?


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> When I mean full contact, it doesn't mean it has to be a fight to the death. There would be determining factors on who would win.
> Have I done full contact fighting? Not as a sport, but when I was younger, I used to get into many fights (before I started martial arts of coarse).



"Cobra"- listen to what you're saying here.  In one statement, you talk about fighting no rules, with all of these devastating shots, and here you're saying that it doesnt have to be a fight to the death.  I'm getting confused here.



> MJS, could you politely tell me why you doubt I have any martial arts experiance? Surely it isn't because I didn't know what fishooking meant? What have I shown to you to think that I don't have any experiance in Martial Arts? I'm no black belt yet, is that what kind of experiance you mean?
> 
> And MJS, why don't you make peace? Why is it every damn posts I write, you are there to criticize me? Is that your life, criticizing people who you don't like? Do you have many friends? Honestly, what joy do you have in criticizing everything I say?



It has nothing to do with not knowing what the term fish hook meant.  I shouldnt have to explain to you what I'm talking about here.  You should be able to see what I'm talking about by re-reading your posts.  And yes, I have many friends.  I question your posts, just like so many others question them as well, due to the nature of them for one.  I'm referring to the animal posts here.  In addition, I just get the impression, that if you state that you have all of the experience that you claim, the questions that you ask do not make any sense.  I shouldnt have to post what I'm talking about.  Again, if you re read your own posts, and the responses not only from me but from the others as well, you should be able to figure it out.  I also dont understand why you think I single you out.  Again, if you re read, you'll see that others on here are also questioning you.

Mike


----------



## Cobra (Apr 22, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> "Cobra"- listen to what you're saying here. In one statement, you talk about fighting no rules, with all of these devastating shots, and here you're saying that it doesnt have to be a fight to the death. I'm getting confused here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The rules I would imagine is if you make them tap out or a 10-30 second KO count. It doesn't have to end up in death. 

First off, when did I say I had such big experiance? I'm no black belt like you might be, in fact I am pretty new to Asian Martial Arts. And, if you tell them to me politely why you doubt why my posts don't make sense, matters can be resolved more easier. For example, C2Kenpo said I sometimes get off the topic. He politely told me that and I saw that and should stay on topic. but he doesn't follow every post I make and critisize me. And who says that people doubt I had martial art experiance? People just say my posts sometimes aren't legit, not I don't know anything about martial arts. So far, you are the only one who questions my knowlage on martial arts.


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> The rules I would imagine is if you make them tap out or a 10-30 second KO count. It doesn't have to end up in death.
> 
> First off, when did I say I had such big experiance? I'm no black belt like you might be, in fact I am pretty new to Asian Martial Arts. And, if you tell them to me politely why you doubt why my posts don't make sense, matters can be resolved more easier. For example, C2Kenpo said I sometimes get off the topic. He politely told me that and I saw that and should stay on topic. but he doesn't follow every post I make and critisize me. And who says that people doubt I had martial art experiance? People just say my posts sometimes aren't legit, not I don't know anything about martial arts. So far, you are the only one who questions my knowlage on martial arts.



Well, you mention that you've supposedly been doing wrestling for 5yrs.  That doesnt sound like a beginner to me.  You talk about biting, streetfighting, etc.  but now you say that you're new to the arts.  When talking about biting you said that it would be easy to get into a triangle choke.  Well, first off, for someone thats only been doing BJJ for 3mos. the triangle choke is a more advanced tech.  As for the doubting....go back and re read.  People are always questioning your posts.  Maybe others question your background as well, but I'm the only one that has said it out loud so far.  As for being legit....dude, that is the same thing as questioning your background.  By the way, did you ever post the radio station or newspaper article talking about your battle in the wild???  

Mike


----------



## Cobra (Apr 22, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Well, you mention that you've supposedly been doing wrestling for 5yrs. That doesnt sound like a beginner to me. You talk about biting, streetfighting, etc. but now you say that you're new to the arts. When talking about biting you said that it would be easy to get into a triangle choke. Well, first off, for someone thats only been doing BJJ for 3mos. the triangle choke is a more advanced tech. As for the doubting....go back and re read. People are always questioning your posts. Maybe others question your background as well, but I'm the only one that has said it out loud so far. As for being legit....dude, that is the same thing as questioning your background. By the way, did you ever post the radio station or newspaper article talking about your battle in the wild???
> 
> Mike


I am new to ASIAN Martial Arts. And just because you don't know MA, doesn't mean don't know about this stuff and you are helpless in a fight. And you only started to doubt my knowlage in when I siad I didn't know what is fishooking. I think it is because of that you doubt my knowlage.

Honestly though, can we ever stop arguing about this! Please, I am tired of arguing with you on this matter. If you think I am a joke, don't post on my threads. I've never met anyone who is so against me like this!


----------



## c2kenpo (Apr 22, 2004)

okay kids.

Lets everyone get back on topic here. 

Cobra as I said the reason I can see questioning of your training, are the staetments you have made that in the MA community just dont come to any logical sense. And that may be due to some inexperince in the arts if that is so then welcome and I wish you a grand time on your Journey, just be prepared for some of those questions you ask it's kinda "opening the door" for questions and criticisim. (Kinda like being a politician ~ open your mouth and get hammered)

Lets move back to the topic ...

Tounament Sparring Yes or No
Street Fight Yes or No (Please bear with me)

Keep your posts simple and explina why or why not "soft targets" would be cconsidered a "cheap shot"


Tournament sparring ~ Definatly not legal. Even in professional fights Boxing UFC, Pride the targets are LIFE CHANGING targets. This is why we have rules and a society to determine those rules.

Street Fight ~ Sure everything should be legal however be prepared to face the concesquences of your actions after your wuold be assailant sues you for the loss of his eye due to UNECCESSARY FORCE. This goes back to a LIFE CHANGING target. If you are prepared to bite someones ear off or poke thier eye out be emotionally prepared to deal with the fallout. Talk to Drunk drivers and ask many how they feel about the events that lead them to where they are.

Think in stages of attitude and logic. You can decide the outcome of a fight before the first strike is trhwon if you apply attitude and logic to your environment and your needs.

Do I REALLY need to break his arm??? OR would a simple take down suffice?
Do I really need to drive my fists into his face or could I simply give him reason not to come back??

Work off of that idea.

Dave


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

Cobra said:
			
		

> I am new to ASIAN Martial Arts. And just because you don't know MA, doesn't mean don't know about this stuff and you are helpless in a fight. And you only started to doubt my knowlage in when I siad I didn't know what is fishooking. I think it is because of that you doubt my knowlage.
> 
> Honestly though, can we ever stop arguing about this! Please, I am tired of arguing with you on this matter. If you think I am a joke, don't post on my threads. I've never met anyone who is so against me like this!



Yes, I agree!  This is getting kind of out of hand here.  Just do us, especially me, a favor.....If you honestly have a question about something that you dont know, please ask.  But, think before you post, and rather than make something up about your training, if you honestly dont know, feel free to ask.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Apr 22, 2004)

C2Kenpo- Good post!!  I agree!  There have been many debates on what should/should not use in a fight.  Like I've said before, the UFC/Pride events are currently called MMA.  You bring up a very good point when talking about the strikes that can have an effect on someones life.  Even in a life and death situation, you still need to be able to justify whatever it is that you're doing.  I mean, we see it all the time.  The court system, IMO, is really messed up, because it always seems like the bad guys turn around and sue you for injuries that they got.  So basically, at 2am, someone can try to break into my house. Now, its dark, so I wouldnt know if he had a weapon.  If I hit this guy, and he fell down a flight of stairs, its very possible that he could sue me for his injuries.  Now I didnt tell this guy to break into my house..he did it on his own.  

But back to the thread.  The same is applied to all aspects of life, be it in the ring or the street.  The fighters that compete in these events are professionals and this is their way of life.  Even the most simple of hits can have a serious effect.  Look at a recent UFC event.  Randy and Vitor.  Randy sustained a very serious eye injury.  And that was caused by a simple punch.

Mike


----------



## 7starmantis (Apr 27, 2004)

This thread is actually starting to get some good posts on it.

One thing I would like to discuss...well, I'll just start a new thread on it.

7sm


----------



## someguy (Apr 27, 2004)

It's cheap if its done to me.  If I do it it isn't cheap at all. :uhyeah:


----------



## Nightingale (Apr 27, 2004)

A groin shot or an eye gouge is only a cheap shot if you're sparring with a pal.  on the street, there's no such thing as a cheap shot, just a good shot.


----------



## Fightfan00 (May 1, 2004)

I dont think anything is a cheapshot when a fight is concerned groin shots and eye attackes are priceless!Just remember cheap shots win games!


----------



## MichiganTKD (May 4, 2004)

Extreme situations call for extreme measures. If someone is just being a nuisance, then biting or groin kicking or eye gouging is not warranted. But if your safety or your family's safety is in serious danger, then do whatever you have to do. However, with biting there is a real danger of blood borne pathogens (HIV, hepatitis etc.) Keep that in mind before biting off a piece of his hand.


----------



## MJS (May 4, 2004)

MichiganTKD said:
			
		

> Extreme situations call for extreme measures. If someone is just being a nuisance, then biting or groin kicking or eye gouging is not warranted. But if your safety or your family's safety is in serious danger, then do whatever you have to do. However, with biting there is a real danger of blood borne pathogens (HIV, hepatitis etc.) Keep that in mind before biting off a piece of his hand.



That is a good point regarding HIV, etc.  However, keep in mind that there is a chance, during the course of the fight, that your hands could become cut, allowing blood to enter the wound.

Mike


----------



## Marry (Mar 17, 2005)

I don't think so,not in a street fight.I remember being down town at night waiting for the bus and this large crazy lady came up to me pushed me a few times and was yelling at me for who knows what!?Then she grabed my neck from the front and then that was it!I punched at her and pushed her without any real effect.That was it!!She had left a very vulnerable area open and I took the oppoptunity and gave her a front snapkick to her most sensitive area.And she dropped like a ton of bricks in her tracks to the fetal position on the cement and gasping for air!!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Mar 17, 2005)

Marry said:
			
		

> I don't think so,not in a street fight.I remember being down town at night waiting for the bus and this large crazy lady came up to me pushed me a few times and was yelling at me for who knows what!?Then she grabed my neck from the front and then that was it!I punched at her and pushed her without any real effect.That was it!!She had left a very vulnerable area open and I took the oppoptunity and gave her a front snapkick to her most sensitive area.And she dropped like a ton of bricks in her tracks to the fetal position on the cement and gasping for air!!


Works for me.


----------



## Jerry (Mar 18, 2005)

They are targets the same as anything else. Eyes are espically good in that they tend to impede the ability to fight well.


----------



## Marry (Mar 18, 2005)

Jerry said:
			
		

> They are targets the same as anything else. Eyes are espically good in that they tend to impede the ability to fight well.


More like the in-ability to see!And if they can't see ya that makes them a pretty useless attacker.


----------



## ginshun (Mar 18, 2005)

Obviously you have to assess the situation, to see whether or not shots like that are warrented.  In the case that you decide they are I say go for it.  If the situation is life or death for you or a loved one, then anything goes.  The best ways to immobilize someone are shots to the eyes, throat or leg joints.  It makes it hard for them to fight back if they can't see, cant' breath or can't walk.


 I am not going to gouge someones eyes out in a wrestling match with a buddy, but I sure as hell am if a stranger is going after my kid with a bat.


----------



## sammy3170 (Mar 19, 2005)

I cant be bothered reading 5 pages of replies so I will just post my thoughts. If your life is at stake do ANYTHING you can.  Stab them in the eye with a pen.   If it is not well I wouldn't bite them as you never know what they've got. Go for eyes but know that if they go blind and your life wasn't threatened you would be in the poo. Lastly kicking in the balls though painful can be somewhat ineffective against a large adrenalised man.  Yes it will hurt but will it stop?

Cheers
Sammy


----------



## MJS (Mar 19, 2005)

Sammy brought up some good points.  In a life and death situation, doing anything is usually the route that people take.  However, like it was also said, you need to be 100% sure of the situation and judge accordingly what you do, otherwise you could be facing some serious legal problems.

One thing that I did find interesting in the post was when this was said:



> Lastly kicking in the balls though painful can be somewhat ineffective against a large adrenalised man. Yes it will hurt but will it stop?



Now, speaking for myself here, I'm not a fan of the one shot one kill mentality.  Now, this is certainly not a slam on Sammy or the post, but if we stop and think about it, will anything we do, be it a punch, kick, or whatever, work and stop the person if he is a person like the one mentioned above??  Large, has the adrenaline racing, possibly under the influence of something.

IMHO, we should not rely on one thing, but instead a series of moves.  Looking thorough some past posts, I've read mixed views on things such as eye gouges and biting, with some people saying they're effective and others saying they are not.  One thing that we need to keep in mind, is that these moves, just like all of the others we have, can be used to distract and set up additional moves.  A quick jab to the eyes can momentarily distract your attacker, to allow you to either, A) Follow up with other moves or B) get out of the area.  

Everything has its time and place.  Its just a matter of finding the right time and the right place.

Mike


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Mar 19, 2005)

MJS said:
			
		

> Sammy brought up some good points. In a life and death situation, doing anything is usually the route that people take. However, like it was also said, you need to be 100% sure of the situation and judge accordingly what you do, otherwise you could be facing some serious legal problems.
> 
> One thing that I did find interesting in the post was when this was said:
> 
> ...


In answer to your question "will anything work", it might help to share some of my experience as an LEO. Techniques that are based on pain are usually referred to simply as "Pain compliance". They work because they over come the person's desire to continue fighting. These can often take the form of pressure points being pressed or strikes that don't incapacitate, but simply cause pain. 

However, since that "desire" is really a descision by the person, much of whether they continue to fight is based on them. Therefore, if someone "desires" to continue fighting badly enough, they can overcome "Pain compliance" techniques to do it. 

There are also techniques designed to cause "Disfunction". These techniques work under the principle that they cause a response within the body of the subject that actually prevent part or all of the subject to not work properly. These can take the form of strikes to certain nerve junctions, such as a thigh kick, that result in a large muscle group becoming unable to function. This could also be a strike to a major nerve group in the jaw or the neck that renders a subject unconcious. "Pain compliance" techniques works much of the time, "Disfunction" techniques work much more often because they aren't reliant on a decision by the subject. 

I've found that techniques that result in incapacitation, such as strangles(especially hadaka-jime) are extremely effective against even the most pain compliant. A man who is capable of sustaining several strikes to the groin, for example, can be rendered unconcious in seconds by use of a rear naked choke. Why? Because it doesn't rely on his deciding to "cooperate". The mechanisms, once they are put in to place, are outside his control. His brain will eventually be starved of oxynated blood and he will lose conciousness.

What you said is correct.  We cannot rely on just one technique to attempt to control all subjects.  I tend to look at different techniques by percentages.  A pressure point technique might be a 60% technique, while the hadaka-jime might be a 90%+ technique.


----------



## still learning (Mar 20, 2005)

Hello, Groin and eye attacks? When in a real fight most of us will want to end the fight as quickly as possible and leave. The book "Anything goes" and those written by Marc"the animal" Macyoung talks about there is "NO RULES" in fighting. People will use anything and everything around them to fight with.

 Cheap shots are no longer around today? Samurai, knights,gun duels with twenty paces are no longer observed into todays world. Two friends arguing and fighting to slug it out may consider not using cheap shots? 

 Remember in today's world "America" there are laws and what ever damage you cause? You will pay for it. Keep in mind you may win the fight? but what about revenge from the other guy later? 

 The best thing in to Avoid, if possible? ....Anythings goes when the fight starts...you will never know what the other guys has on him. .....Aloha


----------



## KungFuWarrior (Mar 20, 2005)

still learning said:
			
		

> The best thing in to Avoid, if possible? ....Anythings goes when the fight starts...you will never know what the other guys has on him. .....Aloha



I agree with you the best thing to do is try and avoid the confrontation alltogeter.  I look at it like this when the fighting starts that means that my opponent or opponents goal is to hurt me or my family at which point I will use whatever means is necessary to stop him.  At my school we train to use groin shots and other shots that are often referred to as "cheap" shots, but we don't train to use them as finishing manuevers but as a way to create an opening for say a knockout or a takedown.


----------



## MJS (Mar 20, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> In answer to your question "will anything work", it might help to share some of my experience as an LEO. Techniques that are based on pain are usually referred to simply as "Pain compliance". They work because they over come the person's desire to continue fighting. These can often take the form of pressure points being pressed or strikes that don't incapacitate, but simply cause pain.
> 
> However, since that "desire" is really a descision by the person, much of whether they continue to fight is based on them. Therefore, if someone "desires" to continue fighting badly enough, they can overcome "Pain compliance" techniques to do it.
> 
> ...



Thank you for taking the time to give more insight to this subject. :asian: 

This is probably one of the main reasons why I always stress to be as well rounded as you can.  If one tech. is not working, move onto something else until you find something that does work.  

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but as a LEO, I'm sure you have some sort of 'Use of Force" ladder that you follow?  IE: Pain compliance, OC, etc.  The reason I ask, is because it appears that is the method that is being followed above...pain and dysfunction techs.

Mike


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Mar 20, 2005)

MJS said:
			
		

> Thank you for taking the time to give more insight to this subject. :asian:
> 
> This is probably one of the main reasons why I always stress to be as well rounded as you can. If one tech. is not working, move onto something else until you find something that does work.
> 
> ...


As a general rule, law enforcement agencies tend to place simple pain compliance techniques (i.e. pressure points, joint locks, OC Spray) before disfunction techniques (LVNR/Rear naked choke, Baton strikes, Brachial strikes, etc), because disfunction techniques have a higher likelyhood of injury involved. That is not a hard and fast rule, however, as the Taser tends to be a lower threshold use of force because of it's low likelyhood of permanent injury compared to other techniques while still being the ultimate in disfunction causing tools.


----------



## Martial_Maniac (Mar 22, 2005)

In my system, some of the most basic forms you learn have attacks to the eyes and groin, so I think it's fair to attack these areas if you are defending yourself.  But then again, why would we use martial arts in any other way?


----------



## Loki (Mar 23, 2005)

I feel like I'm repeating other posts already, but they're all on the right track. There are no cheap shots when your life or safety are on the line. Everything goes. As for not being able to strengthen weak points, well, that's exactly what makes them weak points. Eyes, groin, windpipe, nose, lip, ear, knee, toe, shin (unless you kill all the nerves in them like Muay Thai champions in Thailand, solar plexus, spine, ribs, back of the head... these are all areas that can't be stregthened. These should be your targets when defending yourself/others.

~ Loki


----------



## Jerry (Mar 23, 2005)

> More like the in-ability to see!And if they can't see ya that makes them a pretty useless attacker.


This is a commonly held if rather false belief. If you are touching someone (or they are touching you), you don't *need* to see them; though the ability to work by touch reference varies from person to person.



> I am not going to gouge someones eyes out in a wrestling match with a buddy, but I sure as hell am if a stranger is going after my kid with a bat.





> However, like it was also said, you need to be 100% sure of the situation and judge accordingly what you do, otherwise you could be facing some serious legal problems.


A match is not a fight. I'm curious how you determine "warranted". If my little 170lbs was standing in front of you unarmed, would you try to reign yourself in? Considering how fast fights are essentially over, will you have time to realize that you are loosing and change tactic? Once I've got the upper-hand, what (other than exaustion) stops me from beating you to death... by then it's too late to make that determination.


----------



## MJS (Mar 23, 2005)

Jerry said:
			
		

> A match is not a fight. I'm curious how you determine "warranted". If my little 170lbs was standing in front of you unarmed, would you try to reign yourself in? Considering how fast fights are essentially over, will you have time to realize that you are loosing and change tactic? Once I've got the upper-hand, what (other than exaustion) stops me from beating you to death... by then it's too late to make that determination.



Not quite sure who you're addressing this to, considering you are quoting 2 different people here..myself and ginshun.  However, seeing that you quoted something I said, 



> However, like it was also said, you need to be 100% sure of the situation and judge accordingly what you do, otherwise you could be facing some serious legal problems.



I'll address my part.

A few things to take into consideration here.  What is the situation we're in?  Are we sucker punched?  Do we have the attacker in front of us?  Are there weapons? Is there more than 1 attacker?  Is escape an option?  

As you can see, the list can go on and on.  One thing to keep in mind is that we're going to fight like we train.  Adding in some aliveness and realism to our training, rather than always training in a static fashion, will assist you in dealing with that adrenal dump.  

We are talking about groin shots and eye gouges here.  Does the situation, whatever it may be, warrant an eye gouge??  If you're walking down the street and some homeless person asks you for money, you say no and keep walking, he did nothing to warrant an eye gouge. Now, if you say NO, keep walking and he starts to follow you, grabbing your shoulder, does that warrant an eye gouge?? IMO, no!  Now, in the process of that grab, he pulls a knife.  As you can see, the situation is escalating.  That being said, we need to be able to judge what we're going to do, no matter how stressfull the situation is.  If a LEO finds him/her self in a situation that is rapidly escalating, they need to make split second choices, and at the same time, make sure they're making the right choice.  If they shot someone when a less lethal option was available, I'm sure there would be some serious questions to be answered.



> Once I've got the upper-hand, what (other than exaustion) stops me from beating you to death... by then it's too late to make that determination.



Whats to stop the defender from re-gaining the upper hand??

Mike


----------



## Jerry (Mar 24, 2005)

> Whats to stop the defender from re-gaining the upper hand??


Loss of momentum / position. Once you are on the ground being stomped, it's a little late to decide "oh! I should do more than I did". 

It's always been one of the complaints by grapplers to this discussion... the assumption that the person going for the eyes and groin only starts donig so once he's mounted and being pounded. At that point, it's not going to change the outcome.

Same applies here. When your opponent is 25 feet from you, you have an option (for example) to deploy a handgun. When we are in the middle of a fight, and you decide "Oh heck! This guy is much better than I am", your opponent can prevent you from deploying your firearm.

Any reciprocity of force rule suffers this same fate. When you've been disoriented by that solid blow to the head. When you are on your stomach on the ground with the back of your head being pummelled. When you are tied up standing in just a crappy position, you are less likely to have a positive outcome than at that moment when the fight started.

In both my reasearch and observation, most fights are actually decided in the first couple seconds. After that, the person that's loosing is going to loose. Reversals happen, but are not terribly common. Why do you think boxing matches stop when one guy goes down?



> Now, if you say NO, keep walking and he starts to follow you, grabbing your shoulder, does that warrant an eye gouge?? IMO, no! Now, in the process of that grab, he pulls a knife. As you can see, the situation is escalating.


In your story, what did he do? Back up, pull a knife and show it too you? Much of what I've seen of stabbings, you just get stabbed. There isn't this period of warning where the knife is paraded around. That's exactly the problem.

The tactical folder I carry has a black blade. Would you like to know why?

There's two schools of though on knife use. One is to carry a shiny blade. The nice thing about this is that the opponent is distracted and focused on the fact that you have a knife. It is hoped that this will cause them to be distracted during the course of cutting them up.

The other school of thought is that it's better for the balde to remain unnoticed. It's quite possible to cut someone without them realizing that they are being cut. By the time they do notice, and escilate their response, you've already opened up several major arteries. There are even slapping cuts in my art, part of the purpose of which is to overwhelm the cutting sensation so that the opponent doesn't realize it's happening.

But even assuming that your opponent doesn't have a weapon, what if he simply wins? You are dazed and semi-consious on the ground and he decides to kill you. What position are you in to do anything about it then? Do you think you would have done better to try your hardest to win from the get-go?


----------



## MJS (Mar 24, 2005)

Jerry said:
			
		

> Loss of momentum / position. Once you are on the ground being stomped, it's a little late to decide "oh! I should do more than I did".



There is going to be 3 phases during the attack..before, during and after.  As I stated in my previous post, we need to be constantly aware of changes.  Yes, I agree, to wait until we are already on the ground before we realize, "Hmmm...gee, I should have done something to prevent this!!" is not the best course of action to take.  But again, what could we have done prior??  Again, thats why I say its important to be aware.



> It's always been one of the complaints by grapplers to this discussion... the assumption that the person going for the eyes and groin only starts donig so once he's mounted and being pounded. At that point, it's not going to change the outcome.



See above regarding being aware and not waiting.



> Same applies here. When your opponent is 25 feet from you, you have an option (for example) to deploy a handgun. When we are in the middle of a fight, and you decide "Oh heck! This guy is much better than I am", your opponent can prevent you from deploying your firearm.



Again, I mention the before, during and after phases.



> Any reciprocity of force rule suffers this same fate. When you've been disoriented by that solid blow to the head. When you are on your stomach on the ground with the back of your head being pummelled. When you are tied up standing in just a crappy position, you are less likely to have a positive outcome than at that moment when the fight started.



We can look at this a few different ways here.  First, we should not assume that that blow to the head is going to put us down and out for good.  Speaking for me only, I'm not a fan of the one shot one kill mentality.  Now, are we talking about a sucker punch??  If I was in a verbal confrontation with someone, the last thing I'm going to do is turn my back on the guy.  Why, so he can hit me??  The importance of being aware comes to mind again.



> In both my reasearch and observation, most fights are actually decided in the first couple seconds. After that, the person that's loosing is going to loose. Reversals happen, but are not terribly common.



We can't predict the outcome.  We can hope for the best though.  We can "what if" this to death, but in the above paragraph, we are going off of what you have seen.  Everyone will have a different expereince.



> Why do you think boxing matches stop when one guy goes down?



Because its a sport with rules.  If on the street, the chances of the fight continuing are good.  IE: The victim goes down, but the bad guy has to get in a few last shots before leaving.



> In your story, what did he do? Back up, pull a knife and show it too you? Much of what I've seen of stabbings, you just get stabbed. There isn't this period of warning where the knife is paraded around. That's exactly the problem.



Never said that there was a period where the knife was 'paraded' around.  I said in the process of that grab, he pulls a knife.  Now, could he grab me and stab me in the back? Yup.  Could he grab me, turn me around and stab me in the stomach? Yup.  Can he grab me, turn me around, and wave the knife in a threatening manner? Yup.  Training in the arts does not make any of us Supermen, and I certianly never said that I was a Superman.  Again, we can "what if" this to death.  We can't predict the outcome, but we can hope for the best.




> But even assuming that your opponent doesn't have a weapon, what if he simply wins? You are dazed and semi-consious on the ground and he decides to kill you. What position are you in to do anything about it then? Do you think you would have done better to try your hardest to win from the get-go?



Thats correct, what if?? What if this, what if that.  Again, we can sit and come up with countless senarios.  In yours, it seems that you have the defender in a bad position all of the time.  

Well Jerry, I've given my thoughts.  I would however, like to hear from you regarding this subject.  If you were in that situation, getting grabbed, what would be your response?  Would you take the guys eyes for a mere push?  A grab? Calling you a name?  

We can sit 10 people, ask them the same question, and most likely get a different reply from the majority of them.  So...will any of them be able to come up with "The" answer?  People are taken to court all the time.  I don't want to stand IFO the judge and have to answer, "Yes your Honor, I blinded this man for life because he stood in my way and asked me for a dollar for food."  

Mike


----------



## Jerry (Mar 24, 2005)

> There is going to be 3 phases during the attack..before, during and after. As I stated in my previous post, we need to be constantly aware of changes. Yes, I agree, to wait until we are already on the ground before we realize, "Hmmm...gee, I should have done something to prevent this!!" is not the best course of action to take. But again, what could we have done prior??


To address the particular case of this topic: we could have gone ahead and not limited the violence of our response (avoiding eyes for example) once the fight had started. 



> We can look at this a few different ways here. First, we should not assume that that blow to the head is going to put us down and out for good. Speaking for me only, I'm not a fan of the one shot one kill mentality. Now, are we talking about a sucker punch?? If I was in a verbal confrontation with someone, the last thing I'm going to do is turn my back on the guy. Why, so he can hit me?? The importance of being aware comes to mind again.


Although Geoff Thompson does indeed support the possability of a fight ending in that first hit, that's not really what I'm talking about. 

In most of the fights I've seen, there's a point very early in (sometimes with that first hit) at which one person becomes dominant in the fight. Even going back to my SCA days, the fights are pretty even then pretty one-sided; and only very rarely does someone who is "loosing" come back from that position (even though the same two people fighting again may have a reversed outcome).

When someone has gotten that moemtairy advantage, and pressed it, it is difficult and unlikely for their opponent to recover unless there is a break in the fighting. Giving up tactics which may give you that advantage, and trying to revert to them only after you have lost parity and are suffering under the momentum of your opponent's attack, is not (in my experience) an effective strategy. 



> We can't predict the outcome. We can hope for the best though. We can "what if" this to death, but in the above paragraph, we are going off of what you have seen. Everyone will have a different expereince.


If outcomes were known, there would be no reason for this conversation. The question at hand is "do you try to guess the outcome and respond appropriately" (which appears to be your position), or do you "assume the worst and respond appropriately" (which would be mine).



> Because its a sport with rules. If on the street, the chances of the fight continuing are good. IE: The victim goes down, but the bad guy has to get in a few last shots before leaving.


I believe that you missed my point. Why not simply continue boxing with one guy on the ground? One of the several true answers is that the person still on his feet will dominate a boxing match almost every time. The fight is essentially over. Stopping is a pause and restart.

I'm less worried about the "last few shots" and more worried about the person that simply kills me.



> Never said that there was a period where the knife was 'paraded' around. I said in the process of that grab, he pulls a knife. Now, could he grab me and stab me in the back? Yup. Could he grab me, turn me around and stab me in the stomach? Yup. Can he grab me, turn me around, and wave the knife in a threatening manner? Yup. Training in the arts does not make any of us Supermen, and I certianly never said that I was a Superman. Again, we can "what if" this to death. We can't predict the outcome, but we can hope for the best.


Correct me if I've misinterpreted you; but you seem to be advocating a minimalist response until you become aware of the knife, only then reacting with more force. My counter to that is that such a dely may cost you the fight (i.e. your life).



> Thats correct, what if?? What if this, what if that. Again, we can sit and come up with countless senarios. In yours, it seems that you have the defender in a bad position all of the time.


No, but it's the times that we are in a bad position I'm worried about. There's not much of a discussion for when we win. 



> Well Jerry, I've given my thoughts. I would however, like to hear from you regarding this subject. If you were in that situation, getting grabbed, what would be your response? Would you take the guys eyes for a mere push? A grab? Calling you a name?


It would take fear that I was in immenant danger. Certainly battery on my person is likely to prevoke a violent response. In my adult life (the occasional time doing police work not withstanding), I've been very successful at simply leaving. It's generally my first choice.


----------



## MJS (Mar 24, 2005)

Jerry said:
			
		

> To address the particular case of this topic: we could have gone ahead and not limited the violence of our response (avoiding eyes for example) once the fight had started.



Yes, of course many options can be available to us.  I was using the eye gouge and groin attack in my posts, as this is the subject of the discussion.  



> Although Geoff Thompson does indeed support the possability of a fight ending in that first hit, that's not really what I'm talking about.



As for the one shot/one kill...Is it possible to KO someone with one shot? Of course, but IMO, its something that should not be relied on.



> In most of the fights I've seen, there's a point very early in (sometimes with that first hit) at which one person becomes dominant in the fight. Even going back to my SCA days, the fights are pretty even then pretty one-sided; and only very rarely does someone who is "loosing" come back from that position (even though the same two people fighting again may have a reversed outcome).



OK, point taken.



> When someone has gotten that moemtairy advantage, and pressed it, it is difficult and unlikely for their opponent to recover unless there is a break in the fighting. Giving up tactics which may give you that advantage, and trying to revert to them only after you have lost parity and are suffering under the momentum of your opponent's attack, is not (in my experience) an effective strategy.



I understand what you're saying Jerry.  Maybe I was unclear.  Please allow me to explain.  When faced with a potential attacker, the situation may unfold with him yelling, swearing at you, etc.  This is the before phase.  He has not yet physically attacked you, just verbally at this point.  Being aware of your surroundings, his actions, possible weapons, etc. is key here. I'm not an advocate of fighting, so using verbal skills, keeping your eyes on him, your hands up in a non-threatening manner, but in a way that they can be used as an offense, ex: Geoff Thompsons "Fence", basically doing what you can to de-escalate the situation w/o having to resort to violence.  

Now, he moves towards you and appears to prepare for a swing at you.  This is the during phase.  Considering the hands should be up, you already have a fairly good defense going on your part.  A pre-emptive strike on the defenders part is in order here.  Thompson and Blaurer come to mind here again.  

Basically I'm not saying to give up anything.  In a life/death situation, use whats available to you.  Just be prepared to justify your actions.  Base your actions on his. 



> If outcomes were known, there would be no reason for this conversation. The question at hand is "do you try to guess the outcome and respond appropriately" (which appears to be your position), or do you "assume the worst and respond appropriately" (which would be mine).



I'm not going to guess anything.  Again, maybe I was not clear in explaining.  I based my reply off of your comment here:



> In both my reasearch and observation, most fights are actually decided in the first couple seconds. After that, the person that's loosing is going to loose. Reversals happen, but are not terribly common.



We can't predict that every fight will turn out like you have witnessed.  I'm going to respond in the manner that is presented to me at the time.  If the guy pulls a knife and is advancing towards me, I would think that attempting to talk him down is not the best option.  If I'm pushed, why respond with a knee break?  I would think that I'd be asked why I didnt, as a trained Martial Artist, respond in a better fashion.  




> I believe that you missed my point. Why not simply continue boxing with one guy on the ground? One of the several true answers is that the person still on his feet will dominate a boxing match almost every time. The fight is essentially over. Stopping is a pause and restart.



Very possible Sir, but we are still talking about 2 different things: boxing and the street.  Boxing rules do not allow that.  The same can be said when they clinch.  What happens? They are broken apart and re started.  In reality, many things such as elbows, knees, headbutts and biting, can be applied from that range.





> Correct me if I've misinterpreted you; but you seem to be advocating a minimalist response until you become aware of the knife, only then reacting with more force. My counter to that is that such a dely may cost you the fight (i.e. your life).



In the senario I mentioned, I was not speaking for myself.  I'm using John Q. Citizen.  Now, speaking for me, I'd do my best to not let it get to that next level.  Being aware of the surroundings: Ex: does he continue to follow me?  Why turn my back on this guy, especially if he chooses to follow me.  Hes making an aggressive more towards me and I'd respond in the proper fashion.  This is where having knowledge of locks/controlling methods other than just striking, is important.  I take it by your reply, that for someone standing in your way, asking for money, possibly putting his hand on you, that you would not think twice about serious harm?  Again, keep in mind, that this man has done nothing in an overly aggressive manner.  Now, of course, like you stated, if the situation escalated, I would respond as such.





> It would take fear that I was in immenant danger. Certainly battery on my person is likely to prevoke a violent response. In my adult life (the occasional time doing police work not withstanding), I've been very successful at simply leaving. It's generally my first choice.



In closing Sir, I'll state again, that I'm not a fan of fighting.  I don't go out looking to start them.  I always do my best to be aware of my surroundings, especially in an area that I have never been to or rarely frequent.  I've always been a believer of doing everything I could to talk my way out first, and use physical responses as a last resort.  

Thank you again for an interesting discussion.  

Mike


----------



## Jerry (Mar 24, 2005)

Hrm. We seem to be disputing thigns we agree on, and I'm not sure how that is happening.

If I've somehow come across as opposing avoidance, verbal deescilation, running, etc., I certainly did not intend to. I'm not advocating attacking everyone who appears to pose a potential threat; and am opposed to such actions.

The question had seemd to be about responses when the physical altercation had acutally occured. Specifically, whether it is appropriate to use "cheap shots" in a fight.

It seems that some responses had been to the effect of "only if your are loosing" or "only if you are at an obvious disadvantage such as if they are armed". I disagree with both of these responses. 

The *reason* that I disagree is because I think it's fallacious to presume that you can reliably tell one from the other. Of course, I make exception of "obvious lack of threat" (I would not attempt to inflict great harm on a 6 year old that attacked me); but I am more concerned with the more generic situations (capable adult vs capable adult). In these instances, I don't *really* know that I'm going to "win"; and I don't really know what the outcome of loosing will be.

I do recognize that, unfortunately, the laws in many (most) juristictions disagree. While I understand the reason, I believe this to be a mistake on the part of the law in question. Ironically, the one state I know to not to this (Texas), in my opinion, goes to far in the opposite direction (allowing the use of deadly force against trespassers on property, not just in houses, and car theives).

Thank you as well

Jerry


----------



## MJS (Mar 24, 2005)

Jerry said:
			
		

> Hrm. We seem to be disputing thigns we agree on, and I'm not sure how that is happening.



LOL!  Yeah, I hear ya.  Unfortunately it seems that it happens alot on forums.  Sometimes when we're thinking one thing, our fingers are typing something else.  Much easier, especially when attempting to explain something technical, to do it in person.



> If I've somehow come across as opposing avoidance, verbal deescilation, running, etc., I certainly did not intend to. I'm not advocating attacking everyone who appears to pose a potential threat; and am opposed to such actions.
> 
> The question had seemd to be about responses when the physical altercation had acutally occured. Specifically, whether it is appropriate to use "cheap shots" in a fight.
> 
> ...



Pretty much in any debate, we're certainly going to get a ton of mixed views.  Looking back at the very first post, it is asking if these shots are cheap.  IMHO, no, but as I've said many times, everything has its time and place.  We just need to make sure that we find that right time.



> I do recognize that, unfortunately, the laws in many (most) juristictions disagree. While I understand the reason, I believe this to be a mistake on the part of the law in question. Ironically, the one state I know to not to this (Texas), in my opinion, goes to far in the opposite direction (allowing the use of deadly force against trespassers on property, not just in houses, and car theives).



Yes, laws may vary from state to state.  Deadly force just because someone is tresspassing....that sounds a bit excessive IMO.  Not disputing you, just stating an opinion.



> Thank you as well



 :asian: 

Mike


----------



## Jerry (Mar 24, 2005)

> Yes, laws may vary from state to state. Deadly force just because someone is tresspassing....that sounds a bit excessive IMO. Not disputing you, just stating an opinion.


 The case that comes to mind was on Halloween in the late 90s. A foregin exchange student, in costume, was looking for a halloween party and went to the wrong house. The owner of the house came out into his doorway or porch, produced a firearm and order the student to leave. The student, who did not understand English well, and (one supposes) got confused that it was a costume, continued to approach. The resident shot the student in his front yeard from his porch or doorway, killing him. The shooter was aquitted.

In Florida, I would be required to enter my house and shut the door (if possible). I am not required to retreat from my house; but if a jury could not find that I was in reasonable fear, I still could not shoot him.

Texas, in my opinion as well, goes too far.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Mar 24, 2005)

MJS said:
			
		

> We can look at this a few different ways here. First, we should not assume that that blow to the head is going to put us down and out for good. Speaking for me only, I'm not a fan of the one shot one kill mentality. Now, are we talking about a sucker punch?? If I was in a verbal confrontation with someone, the last thing I'm going to do is turn my back on the guy. Why, so he can hit me?? The importance of being aware comes to mind again.
> 
> Mike


That's a dangerous assumption that you can't be taken out with one shot. I've been witness to a number fights in the street, and among truly dangerous men, one shot knockouts are not only not rare, but fairly common. They are common because they use the element of surprise. The signs of an impending assault are often times subtle.



			
				MJS said:
			
		

> We can't predict the outcome. We can hope for the best though. We can "what if" this to death, but in the above paragraph, we are going off of what you have seen. Everyone will have a different expereince.
> Mike


"Hope" is not a plan of action.



			
				MJS said:
			
		

> Never said that there was a period where the knife was 'paraded' around. I said in the process of that grab, he pulls a knife. Now, could he grab me and stab me in the back? Yup. Could he grab me, turn me around and stab me in the stomach? Yup. Can he grab me, turn me around, and wave the knife in a threatening manner? Yup. Training in the arts does not make any of us Supermen, and I certianly never said that I was a Superman. Again, we can "what if" this to death. We can't predict the outcome, but we can hope for the best.
> 
> Mike


Knives are rarely displayed before use. When knives are displayed, it is as a warning or a ward against what is perceived as a threat. Sometimes the knife is used as a tool such as in a mugging, but this isn't the majority of instances.



			
				MJS said:
			
		

> Well Jerry, I've given my thoughts. I would however, like to hear from you regarding this subject. If you were in that situation, getting grabbed, what would be your response? Would you take the guys eyes for a mere push? A grab? Calling you a name?
> Mike


I'd take the guys eyes if his "push" or "grab" I perceived as merely an opening move in a larger threat.



			
				MJS said:
			
		

> We can sit 10 people, ask them the same question, and most likely get a different reply from the majority of them. So...will any of them be able to come up with "The" answer? People are taken to court all the time. I don't want to stand IFO the judge and have to answer, "Yes your Honor, I blinded this man for life because he stood in my way and asked me for a dollar for food."
> Mike


Eace person must answer this question for themselves. Do they fear being tried more than being dead or seriously injured? I personally will take my chances with the court. You can hire someone to do the fighting for you in court, you can't hire a professional to defend you in the street (unless you're wealthy, I suppose). They also allow appeals in court. They don't allow appeals on the street. 



			
				MJS said:
			
		

> Besides, I'm not going to stand IFO the judge and say "Yes your Honor, I blinded this man for life because he stood in my way and asked me for a dollar for food."
> Mike


What's really going to happen is, my attorney is going to stand in front of the jury and say "My client, a family man with no criminal history, was attacked by a violent criminal with an extensive criminal history of, among other things, robbery and assault. My client felt, at the point at which this brutal monster grabbed my client and demanded money, that his life was in danger. My client has a wife and two children, and was in fear for his life from an imminent threat from this career criminal. My client responded, out of fear, by doing what he felt was necessary to protect himself from this evil, evil man. Is there anyone on this jury who believes that my client should have simply allowed himself to be brutalized by this predatory monster, simply so that this monster can support his crack cocaine addiction? My client was in FEAR FOR HIS LIFE, and responded with the universal right of self-defense." I never even have to testify, because I can't be forced to testify against myself. All they have is "One-eyed" Pete and his partner, Skid-Row Willie, to testify against me, and they're both in prison orange because they had to be brought from the jail where they are serving time for unrelated robberys to testify. When they testify, my attorney gets to bring up their (extensive) criminal history to impeach their credibility.

Not saying your conclusions are wrong, these are just some thoughts that occurred to me. There's room for more than one interpretation and opinion on the subject.


----------



## MJS (Mar 24, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> That's a dangerous assumption that you can't be taken out with one shot. I've been witness to a number fights in the street, and among truly dangerous men, one shot knockouts are not only not rare, but fairly common. They are common because they use the element of surprise. The signs of an impending assault are often times subtle.



If you notice in post #77, I stated that it is possible, but I'm not going to rely on that one shot.  In addition, you're talking about a sucker punch.  Not every confrontation is a subtle attack.  Like I said, its important to be aware of your surroundings.



> "Hope" is not a plan of action.



So because someone has a bit of training, they'll always win every fight?  One would think that if someone had training, they'd stand a better chance than an untrained person.  Therefore, in the context that I was using the word would be, "Yes we have training, and we would hope that it would not fail us, but there is always that chance it will."



> Knives are rarely displayed before use. When knives are displayed, it is as a warning or a ward against what is perceived as a threat. Sometimes the knife is used as a tool such as in a mugging, but this isn't the majority of instances.



I guess it would depend on the person using it.  In my example, I stated that the person was grabbed from behind and then stabbed, therefore, the knife was not seen.



> I'd take the guys eyes if his "push" or "grab" I perceived as merely an opening move in a larger threat.



Yes, that is an option, but there are other options available as well.



> Eace person must answer this question for themselves. Do they fear being tried more than being dead or seriously injured? I personally will take my chances with the court. You can hire someone to do the fighting for you in court, you can't hire a professional to defend you in the street (unless you're wealthy, I suppose). They also allow appeals in court. They don't allow appeals on the street.



Thats true.  Each person will most likely state something different.  You will however, be judged by your actions once you reach court.




> What's really going to happen is, my attorney is going to stand in front of the jury and say "My client, a family man with no criminal history, was attacked by a violent criminal with an extensive criminal history of, among other things, robbery and assault. My client felt, at the point at which this brutal monster grabbed my client and demanded money, that his life was in danger. My client has a wife and two children, and was in fear for his life from an imminent threat from this career criminal. My client responded, out of fear, by doing what he felt was necessary to protect himself from this evil, evil man. Is there anyone on this jury who believes that my client should have simply allowed himself to be brutalized by this predatory monster, simply so that this monster can support his crack cocaine addiction? My client was in FEAR FOR HIS LIFE, and responded with the universal right of self-defense."



Yes, your attny. will do just that....do his best to defend you, regardless of you being right, wrong or whatever, because that is what he is getting paid to do!!  He will paint the homeless guy out to be the scum of the earth and you the ideal family man.  In addition, we should not assume that every person we may get into a confrontation with is a career criminal.

I would also think that they would look at options that you had available to you at the time.  Could you have walked away?  If yes, then why didnt you?  

Again, we can sit here and "what if" this all day.  Every situation we face will be different, and everybody will have a different way of looking at it.

Mike


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Mar 24, 2005)

MJS said:
			
		

> If you notice in post #77, I stated that it is possible, but I'm not going to rely on that one shot. In addition, you're talking about a sucker punch. Not every confrontation is a subtle attack. Like I said, its important to be aware of your surroundings.
> 
> Mike


That's not the point. The point was the statement that we shouldn't rely on one punch knockouts. We shouldn't rely on OUR one punch knockout, but to the belief that the other guys one punch knockout will fail is setting us up for a huge surprise. 



			
				MJS said:
			
		

> So because someone has a bit of training, they'll always win every fight? One would think that if someone had training, they'd stand a better chance than an untrained person. Therefore, in the context that I was using the word would be, "Yes we have training, and we would hope that it would not fail us, but there is always that chance it will."
> Mike


I said exactly the opposite. Our training is good, but application is better. The belief that our training will pull us out of a situation we allowed to go too far before responding to is a fatal belief. I always assume the person i'm dealing knows how to fight, so I respond accordingly. In a violent confrontation, Speed, Surprise and Violence of Action are my best friend, followed by my training in physical skills. To think that your training will allow you play catchup is a dangerous game, and one I don't intend to play.





			
				MJS said:
			
		

> Again, we can sit here and "what if" this all day. Every situation we face will be different, and everybody will have a different way of looking at it.
> 
> Mike


That's how we prepare "What if" games are an important part of preparation. We in law enforcement and the military use them all the time. It's how we prepare for situations we've not faced yet, but may in the future. Proper Previous Planning Prevents Poor Performance. The situation we deal with may be different, but if it's even in the ballpark of what we've "what if'ed" then we're ahead of the curb. To dismiss "What if" as if it were a waste of time is counter productive. That's how we prepare.

I suppose my training and experience colors my view on things like this.  The civilian public in most jurisdictions are required to retreat if possible when confronted by violence, and even if not possible, they are required to only meet violence with equal violence.  

Law enforcement is NOT required to retreat from (is, in fact many times required to confront) violence.  Further, as a law enforcement officer I'm required to maintain a disparity of force between myself and others.  Which means if they use a fist, I use an impact tool such as a baton.  Whenever these type of debates come up, I usually argue from that perspective, because I do not retreat.  One should always attempt to avoid a violent confrontation (unless it is your job to confront it), and retreat if possible.


----------



## MJS (Mar 24, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> That's not the point. The point was the statement that we shouldn't rely on one punch knockouts. We shouldn't rely on OUR one punch knockout, but to the belief that the other guys one punch knockout will fail is setting us up for a huge surprise.



Yup, you're right, as that other guy will most likely be attempting to hit us with everything he has, with the hopes of getting a KO on us.  So, considering we can't foresee ahead of time what'll happen, maybe I will get KO'd and maybe I won't.  Thats the chance one takes when they engage in a fight.  However, I based my reply off of what you said here:



> They are common because they use the element of surprise. The signs of an impending assault are often times subtle.



This lead me to believe we were talking about a sucker punch, not a face to face confrontation.




> I said exactly the opposite. Our training is good, but application is better. The belief that our training will pull us out of a situation we allowed to go too far before responding to is a fatal belief. I always assume the person i'm dealing knows how to fight, so I respond accordingly. In a violent confrontation, Speed, Surprise and Violence of Action are my best friend, followed by my training in physical skills. To think that your training will allow you play catchup is a dangerous game, and one I don't intend to play.



Who said anything about letting it go too far?  I stated that one would think our training would give us an advantage, but it may not.  I also stated that I too would respond accordingly to the situation that was presented to me at that given moment.  




> That's how we prepare "What if" games are an important part of preparation. We in law enforcement and the military use them all the time. It's how we prepare for situations we've not faced yet, but may in the future. Proper Previous Planning Prevents Poor Performance. The situation we deal with may be different, but if it's even in the ballpark of what we've "what if'ed" then we're ahead of the curb. To dismiss "What if" as if it were a waste of time is counter productive. That's how we prepare.



Let me clarify.  I stated in post #73 the importance of aliveness and realism.  This also includes senario training, so please do not think that I'm against this.  I stated that every situation will be different and we should not assume anything.  



> I suppose my training and experience colors my view on things like this.  The civilian public in most jurisdictions are required to retreat if possible when confronted by violence, and even if not possible, they are required to only meet violence with equal violence.
> 
> Law enforcement is NOT required to retreat from (is, in fact many times required to confront) violence.  Further, as a law enforcement officer I'm required to maintain a disparity of force between myself and others.  Which means if they use a fist, I use an impact tool such as a baton.  Whenever these type of debates come up, I usually argue from that perspective, because I do not retreat.  One should always attempt to avoid a violent confrontation (unless it is your job to confront it), and retreat if possible.



Yes, and here we are talking about 2 different things...civilian and LEO.  The past few posts, I have been talking on a civilian level.  Now when you are off duty, out of uniform, do your options as to what you can/can't do change?  

Now, you mention using a baton.  In the same situation, would you be able to use a gun?

Mike


----------



## safeeagle (Mar 26, 2005)

I teach my students that if you come to the point that you need to defend yourself all bets are off. If you can't run away. Anything goes.


----------

