# A study in street violence



## Tez3 (Aug 15, 2009)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f97_1250293447

These drunken thugs were caught on CCTV and convicted using this evidence but it's interesting to note the course of the attack, does it confirm your impressions of how an attack goes or does it make you think that perhaps your training isn't correct after all?


----------



## K-man (Aug 16, 2009)

Raises a number of questions. Was the victim part of the group? Why did the others try to stop the attacker in such a half hearted way?  Who was the second guy attacked? Was he part of the group?
An excellent example of the reason you can't afford to take a dive. 
Seems almost as if they split into two groups but hard to follow closely. Starts off two one. The lone person falls to the ground on top of his attacker. The second attacker tries to punch and kick the s#*t out of him. Forth guy gets rid of the second attacker. Throughout the clip this 'rescuer' keeps pulling people off and no-one has a go at him. He actually uses good controlling technique. Then there's a guy with a hood who also appears to try and soothe things and a couple more who take a shot when they think they won't get hit.  
Doesn't change anything for me.  I reckon a few well placed hits would have stopped most of it in seconds.  That's what makes me think that they might be 'friends', in which case the age old question .. who needs enemies?


----------



## Rich Parsons (Aug 16, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f97_1250293447
> 
> These drunken thugs were caught on CCTV and convicted using this evidence but it's interesting to note the course of the attack, does it confirm your impressions of how an attack goes or does it make you think that perhaps your training isn't correct after all?


 

Unfortunately the video does not show the beginning of the conflict. Could they run away, or could they avoid it? 

As to the random walking around and people coming and going and running in and leaving and then others coming in the help the bad guys is something I have seen before. 


Does it effect my training? No. I have already looked at that from personal experience and training.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 16, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f97_1250293447
> 
> These drunken thugs were caught on CCTV and convicted using this evidence but it's interesting to note the course of the attack, does it confirm your impressions of how an attack goes or does it make you think that perhaps your training isn't correct after all?



Yeah, that's pretty much been my experience with how those things typically work.......stereotypical drunken violence.   Even without the narrative that this was outside a pub, it's obviously an outside the pub brawl......this is exactly the kind of fight that's fueled by alcohol.


----------



## still learning (Aug 16, 2009)

Hello, NO two fights will ever be the same...

Most fights is fast and furious...weapons can be use anytime...anyone can jumb in...NO rules...ANYTHING GOES!

One key to success...is physcial fitness...to be able to last the lenghts of time...

Most street fights? ....YOU will want to end it as quickly as possible!!!

Focus on TARGETS ....the eyes, throats, breaking joints, USE everything around for additional weapons?protections? (KNOW the LAWS and your rights too)

NO RULES...ANYTHING GOES...ego"s ...trying to be TOUGH and stand your ground is not a good idea...learn to escape 
and run away...

Learn how to use BITING, pinching, scatching,hair techniques, beside the everyday MA stuffs.

Learn how to use your arms and hands for protection of the head...body can take more punishment than HEAD.

Learn Verbal tactics....in case POLICe arrives,law suits, etc...Research this further...We have a great video on this...can't find it right now...great info's in this area..

Yes...many times Class room training...will NOT be the same as a street fight.......

Watch other street fights....most will be fast, furious, anything goes...READ some of the Books from Loren Christsenan....He has great info's on this...

...the real fighting ...many times..different from real class room training

Aloha, ...best to train for REAL STREETS

PS: The hardest thing to do...is trying to be in a more relax STATE OF MIND....adrenline kicks in...the heart pounding..the mind will be in questions....RELAXATION is the KEY to doing the right things....STUDY this more!


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 16, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Yeah, that's pretty much been my experience with how those things typically work.......stereotypical drunken violence. Even without the narrative that this was outside a pub, it's obviously an outside the pub brawl......this is exactly the kind of fight that's fueled by alcohol.


 
For some, well a lot really it's the only way to spend a night out, get tanked up, either fall over in the gutter or get knocked over in fights. Spend half my life sorting these things out, they are so drunk they will fight the police too. Increasingly we are seeing women involved in fighting like this too.
The sights you see on the streets is enough to put you off drink (and people) for life. 
I'm not sure if America has the same type of problems on the streets of the towns and cities as we do every week. The sheer numbers of drunk people out on the streets is overwhelming sometimes. It's not just the fighting, it's the girls staggering around half undressed, throwing up everywhere, the lads comatose in the gutter covered in their own vomit, the hysterics of drunks, the peeing and sex on the street, vandalism and of course the fights and attacks. It's horrific.


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 16, 2009)

still learning said:


> Hello, NO two fights will ever be the same...
> 
> Most fights is fast and furious...weapons can be use anytime...anyone can jumb in...NO rules...ANYTHING GOES!
> 
> ...


 

I'm sure that would work well if the only the people involved were sober, as it is they are all totally wrecked out of their tiny minds. The only sober ones ever on these streets are the police.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 16, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> For some, well a lot really it's the only way to spend a night out, get tanked up, either fall over in the gutter or get knocked over in fights. Spend half my life sorting these things out, they are so drunk they will fight the police too. Increasingly we are seeing women involved in fighting like this too.
> The sights you see on the streets is enough to put you off drink (and people) for life.
> I'm not sure if America has the same type of problems on the streets of the towns and cities as we do every week. The sheer numbers of drunk people out on the streets is overwhelming sometimes. It's not just the fighting, it's the girls staggering around half undressed, throwing up everywhere, the lads comatose in the gutter covered in their own vomit, the hysterics of drunks, the peeing and sex on the street, vandalism and of course the fights and attacks. It's horrific.


Depends on where you go.........


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 16, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> I'm sure that would work well if the only the people involved were sober, as it is they are all totally wrecked out of their tiny minds. The only sober ones ever on these streets are the police.



Exactly!

The reality is that the best defense is avoid drunks and places where drunks congregate.........and if one approaches in a belligerent manner, be prepared to preemptively repel borders.

The good thing about drunks is that they telegraph, owing to their slowed response time (though some are slower than others)........the bad thing is that drunken thugs travel in packs, so if you have to clobber one........get the hell gone before his mates decide to do a tap dance on your skull for your troubles!


<warning strong language> http://www.metacafe.com/watch/256157/drunken_street_brawl_fun/

http://explosivefightvideos.com/fightvideos/21885/fight-in-bar.html


Pretty typical stuff......








I don't know if it's the same in the UK.......but in the US we're required by law to have some screaming drunken chick in the background yelling at every fight!


----------



## myusername (Aug 16, 2009)

Disgraceful! This doesn't change anything for me as my older brother has been a victim of such an attack. What this and other such videos do for me is to reinforce the idea that I need to constantly challenge my fears of hurting somebody with a punch. I remember scare stories when I was a kid designed to stop me fighting such as "it only takes hitting someone in the wrong place to kill them" or the classic "If they hit their head on the pavement and die in a fight you will be done for murder!"

These arseholes didn't care whether their victim suffered brain damage, lived or died! This video clip reinforces the knowledge that you can't take the risk of not fighting back. This clip tells me that if I am attacked it is no good curling up in a ball and hoping that they wont want to hit a passive man. This clip tells me that it is a fight for survival and I should defend myself with everything that I have got to make sure I don't end up in the position those poor blokes found themselves in.


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 16, 2009)

The problem is we just don't have enough police out there, we are talking _thousands_ of drunks out on a night in just one city, in small towns it's hundreds. We have endless pubs, clubs and bars not to mention supermarkets selling alcohol. the government wanted 24 hour opening saying we would then be like Europeans but it doesn't work like that here.
Whole streets are taken up with drunks either belligerant, amorous or passed out. 
We aren't particularly soft on people causing a nuisance and we aren't at all soft on people who fight us. We are just outnumbered on many nights. 
Places like Nottingham, Newcastle and Cardiff for example if you are sober you stay out of the city centre. The streets are as packed as if it were the sales in the shops during the day.

And yes we have the screaming female lol. usually fat and half dressed ugh!


----------



## still learning (Aug 16, 2009)

Hello, Avoidance and Awareness....KEYS to survival

Gift of FEAR...mentions in the book over 23,000 people each year because of there EGO"S...

Drunks all trying to save face....becomes more aggressive because of the beers..!

Yes...easy to knock someone down...have them hit there head on the something/curves/concrete/etc......and DIE...or seriously injure for life...or you instead...

NIce thing about being KILLED? ...most times you will NOT remember it!

Martial ARTS...is about learning to use your skills in these areas-Avoidance and Awareness FIRST!!!

Fighting today? ...is about protecting ONESELF?   meaning...beside MA skills...VERBAL skills and being smarter here?  ...RUN /  ESCAPEing...

How many times?  facing a serious situtions?   ...you find yourself willing to die when fighting back?    ( da..KILLER INSTINCTS ) 

Do you have this?   ......Aloha


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 17, 2009)

Well going back to the original post as to whether or not our training is correct or not based upon the video.  Despite everyone's good advice about avoidance and awareness, which are true.  Traditional Martial artists and Sport Arts, fare usuallly quite poorly in the street fight arena, due to training methodology.

Primarily all martial arts train their participants in their particular style based upon strategies for that style.  In other words, Tae Kwon Do's basic strategy is that the leg is longer and more powerful than one's arm.  So if we can increase flexibility and be able to strike our opponent with our leg, we can inflict more damage than using just fists.  Ne?

The problem with these theory, is that you create a mental blueprint of a fighter who is then adopting the exact same strategy as you.  For example a Shotokan Karateka is learning to defend themselves based upon their attacker knowing Shotokan Karate.  Even more you create an image of your assailiant starting their attack from a "fighting Posture" or hands up.  

This in turn starts a reactionary gap, as the unskilled fighter, who more likely than not is your assailant.  As that attack will come from a position that you hadn't trained for.  If you mental cue to throw out a block is when you notice the punch be launched from an on guard position.  But your attacker is throwing sloppy haymakers, from low positions, which by most CCTV they do.  Your reactionary time to conduct a complex motor skill is somewhat degraded.

Aside from sport mental blueprinting and using strategies designed for a similarly skilled opponent.  Martial arts fail in another respect:  in that most assaults are ambushes.  The sucker punch, the push to the tackle, or whatever...very rarely is the situation that you and your assailant, decide to fight, tap gloves, go back to your respective gutter, and come out fighting.

I used TKD and Shotokan as examples, this is by no means disrespect to those arts, as Judo suffers from the same mentality, once you grab collar/sleeve, your opponent does the same, well what if he didn't, and just punched you in the face once you secured your collar grip?  Likewise BJJ, why pass the guard, when I can just repeatedly strike the groin and stomach?

Self Defense is Self defense, Martial arts are Martial arts, never between shall they meet.

Many more unskilled people defend themselves in a day than the martial artist will face in a lifetime.


----------



## blindsage (Aug 17, 2009)

I think there's some merit in the majority of your post but



Aikironin said:


> Self Defense is Self defense, Martial arts are Martial arts, never between shall they meet.


So are you saying MA training is useless for self-defense?



> Many more unskilled people defend themselves in a day than the martial artist will face in a lifetime.


There are a lot more untrained people in the world than trained, so yeah, the numbers would be in your favor on a statement like this, but what's your point?


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 17, 2009)

Well because there are elements of Self defense inherent in MA, training, it is not useless at all, concepts such as Situational Awareness, conflict resolution, Self Awareness, as well as Discipline and Self respect are fantastic tools that Martial Ways provide the participant.  These are inherent in most arts, which is why sometimes stylistic debates tend to be superficial.

The unskilled comment refers to the idea that training in Martial Arts for self defense purposes only, is statistically not in your favor.  I read alot of these forums about "self Defense" applications that read like a bad Wesley Snipes movie ( not a good one like Major League).  When statistically odds are against you ever encountering the liquor store hold up scenario.  And god forbid if one ever encountered that scenario it would be so surreal to a practitioner whose training never developed all the complexities of such an event, that their senses may be entirely overwhelmed to the point that their reaction is no action whatsoever.

Good observations, I should have been more clear.


----------



## BLACK LION (Aug 17, 2009)

"does it confirm your impressions of how an attack goes or does it make you think that perhaps your training isn't correct after all?"  

While I cannot see the video due to my work browser restrictions...I have read about this attack previously... 
Its definately one way it can go, especially dealing in the "anti-social" realm which is where I would classify this...   If I am not mistaken, the resulting injuries where from his face hitting the ground but I could be wrong...  It was definately avoidable and could have started off as a social thing as I am sure there was some sort of "interview".  

As far as I am concerned this situation has no bearing on my training and I dont know if there was any real intent to kill present here... I have been around many altercations like this... 
I have been "the victim" in this situation many times and have the scars to show for...but I also realized where I went wrong and learned how not to make those mistakes again...   
In this case I wouldnt have even been there... and I wouldnt hang around a group of people that would get me into trouble and on top of that not be able to "back me up" and put in thier own work... 
If it was unavoidable...for me,  it would have been much uglier...


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 25, 2009)

Aikironin said:


> Well going back to the original post as to whether or not our training is correct or not based upon the video.  Despite everyone's good advice about avoidance and awareness, which are true.  Traditional Martial artists and Sport Arts, fare usuallly quite poorly in the street fight arena, due to training methodology.
> 
> Primarily all martial arts train their participants in their particular style based upon strategies for that style.  In other words, Tae Kwon Do's basic strategy is that the leg is longer and more powerful than one's arm.  So if we can increase flexibility and be able to strike our opponent with our leg, we can inflict more damage than using just fists.  Ne?
> 
> ...



Ironic that those trained in the 'sport of' boxing seem to usually fair pretty darned well in 'street encounters', untrained attackers or not....

http://fightart.blogspot.com/2007/05/turkish-rambo.html

....even when the boxer is elderly and the opponent a youth. 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...lar-two-powerful-right-hooks-to-the-face.html

http://www.buzzhumor.com/videos/15036/72_Year_Old_Ex_Boxer_Fights_Off_Pick_Pocket

Many more people unskilled people drive on the highway than Mario Andretti.........does that mean they are better drivers than Mario Andretti?



As for the 'self-defense is self-defense, Martial arts are Martial arts, never between shall they meet'........WTF does that mean?


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 25, 2009)

Aikironin said:


> Well because there are elements of Self defense inherent in MA, training, it is not useless at all, concepts such as Situational Awareness, conflict resolution, Self Awareness, as well as Discipline and Self respect are fantastic tools that Martial Ways provide the participant.  These are inherent in most arts, which is why sometimes stylistic debates tend to be superficial.
> 
> The unskilled comment refers to the idea that training in Martial Arts for self defense purposes only, is statistically not in your favor.  I read alot of these forums about "self Defense" applications that read like a bad Wesley Snipes movie ( not a good one like Major League).  When statistically odds are against you ever encountering the liquor store hold up scenario.  And god forbid if one ever encountered that scenario it would be so surreal to a practitioner whose training never developed all the complexities of such an event, that their senses may be entirely overwhelmed to the point that their reaction is no action whatsoever.
> 
> Good observations, I should have been more clear.


  One does not need to prepare for ALL the complexities of an event to be more prepared for them than the average person..........or even than the average attacker. 

The assumption is that the average attacker is some all prepared entity that HAS 'developed all the complexities of such an event'.......and statistics don't bear that out.


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 25, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Ironic that those trained in the 'sport of' boxing seem to usually fair pretty darned well in 'street encounters', untrained attackers or not....
> 
> http://fightart.blogspot.com/2007/05/turkish-rambo.html
> 
> ...


 

Case in point the Turkish Rambo...he may demonstrate some basic, albeit quite effective Boxing skills, but watch the video again. The Primary Initiating assault was Sloppy Haymakers until he could establish his distance, and his position of dominance. The initial ballistic micro fight, was a suddne flurry of wild out of control punches, seldom seen in any martial arts school (except maybe by beginners). His ability to disengage THAN access complex motor skills( his boxing) allowed him to prevail.

The second two examples, one thing in common with criminals is that they will always attack someone that they think that they can beat. Hence no one mugs Forrest Griffin. Both examples point to the fact that once resistance is encountered, the bravado of the attacker quickly dissipates. Hence the saying cooperate with a rapist, get raped. Cooperate with a mugger, get mugged. You get the point.

You Andretti point is fallacious as you failed to define skilled, in terms of driving. Mario Andretti is a formula 1 grand prix racer. everyone else on the road is a licensed driver, which in most states indicates that they attended and passed some sort of basic skills test to indicate competence on the open road. so the correlation does not match, like comparing an Olympic shooter with a SWAT Sniper, two entirely different beasts.

Last Point in Traditional Arts Self Defense was a western concept added with the westernazation of the arts.  Kano, Ueshiba, and Funakoshi's ideals behind Karate, Judo and Aikido were to create better Japanese, in terms of Discipline and "sound mind sound body precepts" for example.  Hence the comment.  In terms of Martial arts as an ideal self defense system why would one train in an art that would take months  maybe years to be "street ready" when there are plenty of Self defense course's that don't require, years of practice, and all other trappings of a traditional martial art.  On sheer economics it makes no sense.


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 25, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> One does not need to prepare for ALL the complexities of an event to be more prepared for them than the average person..........or even than the average attacker.
> 
> The assumption is that the average attacker is some all prepared entity that HAS 'developed all the complexities of such an event'.......and statistics don't bear that out.


 

I agree with you first point as ALL the complexities for each event will be unique and individual to that event.

I don't quite follow you on your last point...and what statistics are you referring too?


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 25, 2009)

Aikironin said:


> I agree with you first point as ALL the complexities for each event will be unique and individual to that event.


 That's not really my point.......the complexities are unique for each event, but one does not need to train for every individual difference between events, to train for common themes that apply across categories.



Aikironin said:


> I don't quite follow you on your last point...and what statistics are you referring too?



Simple......the average attacker is more or less untrained to any great extent......therefore, the notion that he is more prepared for the situation than someone who has received a moderate degree of realistic training. 

This is even more true, for example, where firearms are involved, as the average street punk may receive some very non-formal training actively fighting in the street, the same is not true of firearms skills, and many law abiding armed citizens have far more skill at arms than the average street punk, who probably stole a gun, and maybe fired it a couple times to make sure it worked.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 25, 2009)

Aikironin said:


> Case in point the Turkish Rambo...he may demonstrate some basic, albeit quite effective Boxing skills, but watch the video again. The Primary Initiating assault was Sloppy Haymakers until he could establish his distance, and his position of dominance. The initial ballistic micro fight, was a suddne flurry of wild out of control punches, seldom seen in any martial arts school (except maybe by beginners). His ability to disengage THAN access complex motor skills( his boxing) allowed him to prevail.
> 
> The second two examples, one thing in common with criminals is that they will always attack someone that they think that they can beat. Hence no one mugs Forrest Griffin. Both examples point to the fact that once resistance is encountered, the bravado of the attacker quickly dissipates. Hence the saying cooperate with a rapist, get raped. Cooperate with a mugger, get mugged. You get the point.
> 
> ...



Jibberish intended to sound clever.......allow me to attempt to decipher something from it.



Aikironin said:


> Case in point the Turkish Rambo...he may demonstrate some basic, albeit quite effective Boxing skills, but watch the video again. The Primary Initiating assault was Sloppy Haymakers until he could establish his distance, and his position of dominance. The initial ballistic micro fight, was a suddne flurry of wild out of control punches, seldom seen in any martial arts school (except maybe by beginners). His ability to disengage THAN access complex motor skills( his boxing) allowed him to prevail.



Simply put......his SKILL learned during 'sport' training allowed him to prevail, thereby refuting your earlier point. 



Aikironin said:


> The second two examples, one thing in common with criminals is that they will always attack someone that they think that they can beat. Hence no one mugs Forrest Griffin. Both examples point to the fact that once resistance is encountered, the bravado of the attacker quickly dissipates. Hence the saying cooperate with a rapist, get raped. Cooperate with a mugger, get mugged. You get the point.


 Since victim selection is not even remotely the topic, this comment serves as mere filler, and doesn't really add anything to discussion.......it's apples and banana's with the point of the discussion, which is your comments on 'Martial Arts'/'Sport fighting' versus some nebulously defined 'Self-defense'.........the comments you made were about the physical skills learned in those realms not applying to the street, not other non-physical aspects of 'self-defense' such as avoidance, so why include this comment at all except as filler?




Aikironin said:


> You Andretti point is fallacious as you failed to define skilled, in terms of driving. Mario Andretti is a formula 1 grand prix racer. everyone else on the road is a licensed driver, which in most states indicates that they attended and passed some sort of basic skills test to indicate competence on the open road. so the correlation does not match, like comparing an Olympic shooter with a SWAT Sniper, two entirely different beasts.


 And here we arrive at the core of your error in logic......the notion that skills do not apply across categories, which is fundamentally not true, but it does explain why you believe your earlier statements.

Allow me to demonstrate the fundamental logical error of your belief.........to apply your logic, Andretti's skill at maneuvering a car and 200 mph, in high speed turns, and with other vehicles traveling and the same speeds in close contact, does not translate to having superior vehicle handling skill to someone who managed to paralell park without bumping another car, and was able to correctly spell their name on the top of the test........anyone who gives that notion thought will see how laughable it is.........many concepts apply across categories.......replicating every single variable is not necessary to build skills that apply across categories.  THAT is the point. 



Aikironin said:


> Last Point in Traditional Arts Self Defense was a western concept added with the westernazation of the arts. Kano, Ueshiba, and Funakoshi's ideals behind Karate, Judo and Aikido were to create better Japanese, in terms of Discipline and "sound mind sound body precepts" for example. Hence the comment. In terms of Martial arts as an ideal self defense system why would one train in an art that would take months maybe years to be "street ready" when there are plenty of Self defense course's that don't require, years of practice, and all other trappings of a traditional martial art. On sheer economics it makes no sense.


 I see another main fundamental fallacy in your thinking........a misunderstanding of what a 'martial art' is.......your fixation on Traditional Martial Arts, i.e. Japanese, Korean and Chinese arts, have somehow convinced you that those are the totality of what is a 'Martial Art'.........while 'Self-Defense' is some seperate thing........again, any thorough understanding of the subject shows how ludicrious that duality is.

A punch is a punch..........a 'Martial Art' is any physical combat skill practiced to gain proficiency.........it doesn't just mean the 'Costumed Arts of Japan, China and Korea'..........some of the oldest martial arts, in fact, are Pankration, Wrestling and Boxing, which began in Greece and the near-east as unarmed combat systems in warfare.


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 25, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> That's not really my point.......the complexities are unique for each event, but one does not need to train for every individual difference between events, to train for common themes that apply across categories.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I believe that we are debating the same point on this and are in agreement, with one minor omission, we are in agreement about perhaps the physicality of combat, but are leaving out, the emotional and psychological aspects. The common principles that the trained person could use to prevail a Critical incident provided that they can maintain enough composure to access these skills.  If they merely have physical skill but not the mental aspect, odds tend to not be in their favor, the converse is also true, if they have the mental aspect but not physical they could prevail.  Case in point, the senior citizen who successfully defends themselves, or the woman who beats off the would be rapist.

The reason why many law abiding armed citizens have far more skill is that they train and increase their skill.  But don't be fooled to think that criminals don't train either.  That could be a deadly misnomer, because any person untrained in firearms can kill you just as easily as a trained one.  The difference is that the trained person tends to think certain things through like shot placement, over penetration and the like.


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 25, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Jibberish intended to sound clever.......allow me to attempt to decipher something from it.
> 
> 
> 
> Simply put......his SKILL learned during 'sport' training allowed him to prevail, thereby refuting your earlier point. .


 
I don't see how this refutes my earlier point, merely strengthens the concept that certain skills can carry over, but the intrinsic skills of martial arts such as situations awareness, avoidance and the like are significantly stressed more so in a traditional art than say, martial sports such as Western Boxing, Wrestling, and the like.



sgtmac_46 said:


> Since victim selection is not even remotely the topic, this comment serves as mere filler, and doesn't really add anything to discussion.......it's apples and banana's with the point of the discussion, which is your comments on 'Martial Arts'/'Sport fighting' versus some nebulously defined 'Self-defense'.........the comments you made were about the physical skills learned in those realms not applying to the street, not other non-physical aspects of 'self-defense' such as avoidance, so why include this comment at all except as filler?.


 
Since the thread is street violence under General Self defense, Victim selection is completely germane to the topic. As victim selection is a tangential subject of martial arts, as one who is situationally aware and has some sort of composure ingrained from increased self confidence and awareness, will more likely than not be selected as a victim. 




sgtmac_46 said:


> And here we arrive at the core of your error in logic......the notion that skills do not apply across categories, which is fundamentally not true, but it does explain why you believe your earlier statements.


 
This was your attempt at my logic, not mine, I may have been unclear in that post.



sgtmac_46 said:


> Allow me to demonstrate the fundamental logical error of your belief.........to apply your logic, Andretti's skill at maneuvering a car and 200 mph, in high speed turns, and with other vehicles traveling and the same speeds in close contact, does not translate to having superior vehicle handling skill to someone who managed to paralell park without bumping another car, and was able to correctly spell their name on the top of the test........anyone who gives that notion thought will see how laughable it is.........many concepts apply across categories.......replicating every single variable is not necessary to build skills that apply across categories. THAT is the point.


 
only if the point is how well someone can drive a car at 200 mph, in high speed turns, and with other vehicles traveling at the same speeds in close contact. Than clearly Andretti will come out on top. They may have similiar skills negotiating the I-10 freeway at rush hour.



sgtmac_46 said:


> I see another main fundamental fallacy in your thinking........a misunderstanding of what a 'martial art' is.......your fixation on Traditional Martial Arts, i.e. Japanese, Korean and Chinese arts, have somehow convinced you that those are the totality of what is a 'Martial Art'.........while 'Self-Defense' is some seperate thing........again, any thorough understanding of the subject shows how ludicrious that duality is.


 
It is only a fundamental fallacy in my thinking if my definition of martial art is wrong as compared to what you define martial arts as. Which is the essential point of your posts, your definition of Martial art doesn't match mine, so examples are presented in isolation to prove your point. Which is okay, as are arguments tend to boil down to definitions.



sgtmac_46 said:


> A punch is a punch..........a 'Martial Art' is any physical combat skill practiced to gain proficiency.


 
If you say so, but what passes as most martial arts in the West are either Gendai Budo, or Martial Sports. With the DO suffix, it would indicate that the martial art is technically a "Way" such as "the Gentle Way" or the "Way of Harmony" as opposed to the Jutsu suffix.  Read some Draeger on this although his main points are very fixed in their delineations and some Koryu people tend to refer to their 'jutsu' art as a 'do' such as Jodo.



sgtmac_46 said:


> .........it doesn't just mean the 'Costumed Arts of Japan, China and Korea'..........some of the oldest martial arts, in fact, are Pankration, Wrestling and Boxing, which began in Greece and the near-east as unarmed combat systems in warfare.


 
I never said it did, as I specifically cited Japanese arts, in terms of language classification.


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 25, 2009)

Side point too, while I am thinking of it, Michael Jordan was arguably the best Basketball player of his generation perhaps of all time.  Although when he attempted to play MLB, those skills did not necessarily transfer over.  Certain skills clearly did, dedication, attention to detail, teamwork, and a committment to perfecting his craft.  But his skills at a fade away 3 pt jumper, not so much.  Hence Certain skills from MA do carry over in the larger realm of self defense, but certain skills not so much.

I thought of this as you mentioned Andretti and it got me thinking.  

Good conversation.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 26, 2009)

Aikironin said:


> I believe that we are debating the same point on this and are in agreement, with one minor omission, we are in agreement about perhaps the physicality of combat, but are leaving out, the emotional and psychological aspects. The common principles that the trained person could use to prevail a Critical incident provided that they can maintain enough composure to access these skills.  If they merely have physical skill but not the mental aspect, odds tend to not be in their favor, the converse is also true, if they have the mental aspect but not physical they could prevail.  Case in point, the senior citizen who successfully defends themselves, or the woman who beats off the would be rapist.



That's why Jeff Cooper and many others have rightly pointed out that proper mindset is MORE important than physical skills.......though proper training in physical skills increases confidence and improves mindset.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 26, 2009)

Aikironin said:


> Side point too, while I am thinking of it, Michael Jordan was arguably the best Basketball player of his generation perhaps of all time.  Although when he attempted to play MLB, those skills did not necessarily transfer over.  Certain skills clearly did, dedication, attention to detail, teamwork, and a committment to perfecting his craft.  But his skills at a fade away 3 pt jumper, not so much.  Hence Certain skills from MA do carry over in the larger realm of self defense, but certain skills not so much.
> 
> I thought of this as you mentioned Andretti and it got me thinking.
> 
> Good conversation.



Keep this in mind when discussing Michael Jordan........many of his skills from Basketball did not give him enough of an advantage over elite MLB players to be a star in that sport as well.........but they provided him a significant advantage over the average human being.......and that's really the point.......his MLB skills, because of his Basketball skills, are vastly superior to the average human being. 

The same with Andretti........his skills gained in his career puts his driving skills far beyond that of the average human being, even when you change a few variables.

Likewise, a professional heavy weight boxer who has NEVER been in a street fight, never trained for what you call 'self-defense' STILL carries with him superior to skill to the average person in that environment.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Aug 26, 2009)

Aikironin said:


> I don't see how this refutes my earlier point, merely strengthens the concept that certain skills can carry over, but the intrinsic skills of martial arts such as situations awareness, avoidance and the like are significantly stressed more so in a traditional art than say, martial sports such as Western Boxing, Wrestling, and the like.


 Your statements here represent more of a change in subject, than a furthering of the topic already being discusses.




Aikironin said:


> Since the thread is street violence under General Self defense, Victim selection is completely germane to the topic. As victim selection is a tangential subject of martial arts, as one who is situationally aware and has some sort of composure ingrained from increased self confidence and awareness, will more likely than not be selected as a victim.


 Again, a change of subject.......victim selection is an entirely different topic to the physical applicability of 'martial arts' skills.  One can teach 'situational awareness' without ever teaching one single physical skill, period......apples and oranges. 




Aikironin said:


> This was your attempt at my logic, not mine, I may have been unclear in that post.


 I would concede that I can only respond to what I understand you to be saying, not your intent.




Aikironin said:


> only if the point is how well someone can drive a car at 200 mph, in high speed turns, and with other vehicles traveling at the same speeds in close contact. Than clearly Andretti will come out on top. They may have similiar skills negotiating the I-10 freeway at rush hour.


 Preposterous.......the notion that the reflexes gained by operating at high speeds, don't translate to far lower speeds, when compared to the average person who can manage to start their car and drive it across town is simply silly.





Aikironin said:


> It is only a fundamental fallacy in my thinking if my definition of martial art is wrong as compared to what you define martial arts as. Which is the essential point of your posts, your definition of Martial art doesn't match mine, so examples are presented in isolation to prove your point. Which is okay, as are arguments tend to boil down to definitions.


 Language tends to boil down to definitions......so any discussion is, at it's roots, founded on commonly agreed upon definitions........otherwise we're just screaming noises at each other.





Aikironin said:


> If you say so, but what passes as most martial arts in the West are either Gendai Budo, or Martial Sports. With the DO suffix, it would indicate that the martial art is technically a "Way" such as "the Gentle Way" or the "Way of Harmony" as opposed to the Jutsu suffix.  Read some Draeger on this although his main points are very fixed in their delineations and some Koryu people tend to refer to their 'jutsu' art as a 'do' such as Jodo.


 It's quite clear that you define all your terms by way of the Japanese arts........a bit myopic.

The problem with doing so is that the Japanese arts have their martial skills tied with Japanese religious beliefs, such as Buddhism and Shinto traditions............western and many other martial arts are far more pragmatic in their view of the relationship between means and ends.


----------



## Aikironin (Aug 26, 2009)

If you don't mind I will skip the copy paste on the quotes, it tends to get silly and off topic, much like our last 6 posts.:jediduel:

If we come to terms on definitions of Way vs. Art and how to tie that into the original thread of a study of street violence, without going into the sport vs. street aspect.  Than it could turn into a semantical debate on "combat vs street assault" which are, to me, totally different in certain regards, such as consent and motive.  Regardless, one thing I have left out of this ongoing saga of mediocrity is my definitions of Martial arts and the focus of such.

I usually use D. Draeger's definitions on this, as he really was one of the first to break down such barriers.  Draeger states "that the major purpose of modern bujutsu is to provide officially approved methods of hand-to-hand combat  for people authorized by the government to deal with offenders against the social order; all study and application of such modern bujutsu  is thus confined to Law enforcement agencies and the armed forces of Japan.  Other modern bujutsu  are purely for use  by average citizens as methods of self defense and spiritual training"

Now here in America I would tend to disagree with his first sentence and agree with his second, as you said Westerners are more pragmatic in this sense.  Bujutsu as Draeger defines in the classical sense is that 1. combat 2. discipline 3. morals.  This may fit your definition of Martial Arts, and I suspect it does.  

That being said, what is widely labeled Martial arts in the West fit within Draegers definition of Modern Budo( martial Ways) or what in additional I refer to as martial Sports.  

Draeger defined modern Budo as "consisting of various systems used as spiritual training and religious cultism, forms of physical exercise or education, methods of self defense for individuals in daily life, athletic and recreational activity, and Sport. " With the primary emphasis of 1. Morals 2. Discipline and 3. Aesthetic form.

These are my defintions that I have been working with, and as being predominately Japanese or Eastern in thought, it may be mypoic in your regard, but in general terms could be applied across the spectrum.  As I predominately study Eastern forms, I don't want to make statements on other cultures martial traditions that can easily be disproved.

Which brings me to your point on Western Pragmaticism, which to me, is the crux of the dilemma of Do vs Jutsu or Street vs. Sport.  As Westerners tend to be as you say pragmatic in their studies.  They look at the Martial customs of whatever culture and pick up what they want from them.  This martial imperialism may work in some forms or may be detrimental in others.  For example, a palm tree is a beautiful thing, a palm tree in Upstate Minnesota looks kind of weird.  So taking things out of the cultural context could lead to misapplication of form.  I.e. Thinking that all martial ways are equal to martial arts, or Sport based models are equivalent to effective street self defense.

So back to the race car analogy, if Andretti or anyone of his skill were so better prepared than the average person who by your definition can barely make it across town without incident, which is a complete underestimation of drivers, but for the sake of argument we will keep that same defintion.  Than race car drivers would seldom if ever get in an accident, but just ask fans of Dale Earnhart on this.  Being better prepared doesn't make one, completely prepared.  The best MLB hitters only can hit any given pitch one third of the time.  In fighting terms that would mean you would lose 2/3 of the time.  Which is hardly an acceptable number.

Which then brings me back to the original question of a study of street violence.  If we are practicing a form that even if, as a tertiary characteristic, of self defense.  We are still not training for a street conflict, as I stated earlier, most street attacks, PIA, is a haymaker or tackle of some sorts, whereas Boxers are training themselves to fight, well boxers, TKD people are training to fight TKD people and so on.  Whereas a semi-skilled boxer can more likely than not clean house in certain situations, this is no guarantee against the sucker punch leaving the bar, or the ambush at the ATM.  Which was my initial intent on the post, that the art of choice that most people train in, provides a mental blueprint for a, what I term, an implied consent confrontation, i.e. Judo, TKD, Karate BJJ, whatever you get the point, now in some of those contests there are strict guidelines, and in some like MMA, a bit looser guidelines, but there is still that consent. 

Street fight, unless it is between the two drunks who decide to duke it out over the girl at the end of the bar, which even then, I would hesitate to comment on, has no consent.  The attacker chooses, time, place and level of aggression, which Sport based models don't properly train for.


----------



## prokarateshop (Sep 6, 2009)

Generally, the best defense is to avoid the situation. If all else fails then defend yourself and get away


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 6, 2009)

prokarateshop said:


> Generally, the best defense is to avoid the situation. If all else fails then defend yourself and get away


 
Thank goodness, a post I can understand! And it makes perfect sense!


Aikironin, I haven't the foggiest idea what you are talking about. I really don't like airy fairy stuff, the question simply boils down to if you have to can you fight? The above post is the perfect example of common sense, brevity and smart thinking. Theory isn't much good when it comes to defend yourself unless you use your thesis paper as a cosh!


----------

