# Bar-Brawl Evangelism. Come Join In...



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

I saw a show on TV recently featuring some of the roughest bars in Britain. My favorite was run by an old ex-boxer. When drunken punters got a bit out of hand or threatened one another, or the landlord himself, they were invited upstairs to the boxing ring to settle their differences in a gentlemanly manner. 

_<Devil's Advocate>_
You may think that Dickensian - and in that context it probably is - but transposed into another context: "Bar Brawl Evangelism", it's radically progressive. I'm talking about taking your club or school out onto the street corners to take on all-comers in a mobile fight ring! Not just Fight _Club_ style either - bear in mind that Bruce Lee and Hawkins Cheung were street-fight delinquents in their formative years in HK.

I hear you all sigh, moan and throw your hands up. But why? If you believe your art can cut it on the street then what's to fear? Question.

*You fear getting hurt?* Especially since in your school, you take care to see that doesn't happen. Alas though, that's what happens in a street-fight - and worse too. But OK then, since you're new to this, we'll throw in some trained medical staff ringside, professional boxing style.

*You fear you might get cut?* Especially since in your dojo, you don't use live weapons. Well, surely there's a high likelihood your attacker will take a slice out of you during a blade fight the street? In fact, it seems you might well end up getting cut were you to engage any one of many of the folk here on MT who carry concealed blades  OK then, we're squeamish too, we can search all contestants airport-security fashion and confiscate blades.

What else? *You're afraid there are no rules*, you're opponent might not care to stop. Especially since in your dojang there exists a very strict set of rules and etiquette. Uh-huh, just like the real thing kicking off in a carpark? OK then we're not barbarians, let's have a referee [or a couple of heavies] to break the fight in the case of a KO or impending serious damage.

Anything else? Oh, *you're concerned about weight and skill inequalities*. Especially since where you train, fights are evenly matched. Well if you can't handle that 250lb biker type then maybe you shouldn't be pushing SD in your school so much?? Well, no concession this time: you've got the martial arts training, your opponent doesn't therefore an even match is declared.

Happy now? Oh, *the insurance issue*? Especially since you're suitably covered in your practice hall right? Well, we'll cover that too, we know some extreme sports carriers who are happy to cover us.

So that's everything right?

Well, there's still that fear that er, you might get... uh... beat? 

Well, if I'm wrong then you and your students would be up to this task right? Come on, think wider, that this is Bar Brawl **Evangelism**, that means many folk are going to witness your and your students' fighting prowess and more than likely in light of which, will be encouraged and inspired to come to your practice hall to learn control, fighting skill, confidence and general self-defense strategy. Everyone wins.

If I'm right though, and you are concerned you'll get beat then are you still happy to cite Self Defense as a crowd-puller on your website or in your mission statement? Or are you simply going through the ancient motions of practicing beautiful, flowing movements most of which have ultimately no more purpose in our modern society than dressing up as General Custer and playing out Little Big Horn in one of those re-enactment societies.

What better way to disprove those notions and reaffirm our martial arts as having relevance in today's real world than to take your art out into the street? Bar Brawl Evangelism is the future...

_</Devil's Advocate>_



If you got this far, thanks for reading. I'm very interested in your thoughts in particular as to why this would not apply to your art.

Respects!


----------



## still learning (Mar 30, 2006)

Hello, We are still in the cave man era?  ....FIGHT OR FLEE...that is all we know how?

Man is not mature yet in there growth....look at the world and world leaders....we all can see a WORLD WAR coming soon and near you too?

When someone cuts in front of you?, or yell or get mad at you? or bump you and look to fight you?....What are your reactions in your mind? ...and the other person?     human nature? .....FIGHT OR FLEE

Look around..every country has a Army.  

"If I don't get my way"....most people become a terrorist reaction?

"LOVE" is a nice word:  People Love to fight or love to flee?    "Let's make love"?  .................Aloha


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Mar 30, 2006)

From a tactical stand point, my problem would be losing the element of surprise.  Very important in a SD situation where the perpatrator expects you to act like a sheeple.

And if there are referees and medical personel about, making sure things don't get too out of hand, don't we already have that?

Jeff


----------



## Flatlander (Mar 30, 2006)

Cool!  Let me know when it comes to my town.  I'll be there. :ultracool


----------



## jgrimm01 (Mar 30, 2006)

Bring it. :whip:


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

Still Learning, thanks for your input. 

Do you believe your Kenpo / Karate gives you a greater knowledge, skill and understanding of what's needed for self-defense? If so, do you really think it's reasonable to have that confidence in your ability to defend yourself when you've got no scalable proof that it actually works?

Would you be as confident in our all-comers Bar-Brawling I wonder??

Come and join us on the streets!!



			
				still learning said:
			
		

> "LOVE" is a nice word: People Love to fight or love to flee? "Let's make love"? .................Aloha


There ain't no profits in good, clean lovin'...

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

JeffJ said:
			
		

> From a tactical stand point, my problem would be losing the element of surprise. Very important in a SD situation where the perpatrator expects you to act like a sheeple.
> Jeff


 
Agreed JeffJ, but would you be happy taking your Kenpo out on the street? If such an movement as Bar Brawl Evangelism ever took off, would you have faith in your art's ability to deliver you out of the hands of real trouble?

I think many of us [speaking generally, even personally] are happy in our ignorance. We're happy believing that our art is a viable street shield but I think many of us are plainly closetted in our dojos. Wouldn't it help to get our arts out into the open air? Come and join us on the streets!

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> Cool! Let me know when it comes to my town. I'll be there.


Flatlander, it'd likely be more of a franchise opportunity. Hehe. I'd see it as an occasion for self-exploration and development of the art. I feel your verve though. Come and join us on the streets - you can head us up for Arnis. 

Seriously[!] though, are you happy not to ever have to test or make use of your art in a real world fight? Or if push came to shove -pun intended- would you ultimately have confidence in the workings of your art to defend you?

I think many of us have been indoctrinated through our years of training. We fully believe in a system with no proof of viability and often no merit in a real world fight situation. I have no problem with art for arts' sake but when we're claiming repeatedly that our arts have practical applications in self defense, do we really have the proof to support those claims?

Respects!


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 30, 2006)

So we get back to the same old argument that it's not a martial art unless it's viable on the street.  I have kids to go home to who depend on me.  So ... it's unlikely you will find me whooping it up at the local bar anyhow.  Y'all have fun, now, y'hear?


----------



## 7starmantis (Mar 30, 2006)

Yeah, I'm all for proof but I dont know that what is being discussed is really proof of the arts effectiveness. It all goes back to the individual vs art delima and even then how many millions of variables are there in a fight? I know my training works because I've used it to defend myself from attacks on the street, but I dont think the effectiveness of my training changed simply because of those few attacks....my training was effective before the attacks happened as much as it is now after the attacks.

7sm


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> So we get back to the same old argument that it's not a martial art unless it's viable on the street. I have kids to go home to who depend on me. So ... it's unlikely you will find me whooping it up at the local bar anyhow. Y'all have fun, now, y'hear?


On the contrary, I'm a firm believer in the hugely diverse range of benefits that the arts can confer upon usnamely [but not cinfined to] cardiovascular health, stamina and endurance, physical mobility enhancements, posture, the sense of pride in achievement, and of course the potential for a deep knowledge of oneself. 

Here though, I'm specifically referring to the often unfounded belief that many of us have that what we train in our arts can actually protect us on the street. And I'm not saying they can't - many have proven the contrary but for every one who has, there are dozens who have been damaged trying and countless others who are blissfully happy just not knowing the truth.

Respects!


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 30, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Here though, I'm specifically referring to the often unfounded belief that many of us have that what we train in our arts can actually protect us on the street. And I'm not saying they can't - many have proven the contrary but for every one who has, there are dozens who have been damaged trying and countless others who are blissfully happy just not knowing the truth.



And here again, we return to the argument that everyone trains in martial arts primarily for self-defense?  While it is a significant reason given, I don't think there are many martial artists who walk the streets thinking, "la-aaa ti da-aahh, I'm so sa-aaafe, no one can hurt me, tum ti la la la-aaaa."

RBSD doesn't mean you have to seek a fight or brawl to prove something.


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Yeah, I'm all for proof but I dont know that what is being discussed is really proof of the arts effectiveness. It all goes back to the individual vs art delima


Apologies if this is overgeneralized. Of course I'm not referring to the effectiveness of the art per se but rather the effectiveness of the individual practitioner. At the same time though, were you to engage in such a street-encounter, you would [to some extent] be representational of your art. For that time, you are the embodiment of the system. Were you to be victorious in such a contrived bout, there would be an *evangelical* [if you pardon my fanciful language] outreaching of your art to those onlooking. "Behold, it's an SD art that really delivers on its promises," they'd say...



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> I know my training works because I've used it to defend myself from attacks on the street, but I dont think the effectiveness of my training changed simply because of those few attacks....my training was effective before the attacks happened as much as it is now after the attacks.


7sm, you've hit the nail on the head right there. You are one of those [and you must be only a small percentage of the worldwide MA community] who has transitioned your training from the theoretical stage through the "proof" stage. No doubt your art may well have been effective _before_ you had that requirement to utilise it for real but then how would you have ever known? How can we all tell if what we're doing, what we're training isn't giving us a false confidence in our own abilities as fighters?

Respects!


----------



## 7starmantis (Mar 30, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Here though, I'm specifically referring to the often unfounded belief that many of us have that what we train in our arts can actually protect us on the street. And I'm not saying they can't - many have proven the contrary but for every one who has, there are dozens who have been damaged trying and countless others who are blissfully happy just not knowing the truth.



Is the only way of doing that just pure "street fighting"? There have been many "damaged" trying but does the fact of being "damaged" mean your training is inadequate? The fact is, you could be the top trained fighting in the world and still loose a fight on the street, there are millions of variables that determine what takes place in a real SD fight, how do you propse to train all of them? 

I'm all for the spirit of what you are saying, but breaking and cutting each other up is just not the answer in my book.

7sm


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Mar 30, 2006)

Well, I know from personal experience that my art is effective on "the street".  To me, it sounds what you are proposing, with referees and medicos on hand, is another "NHB" sport.  If you want to do that, train and try to get in the UFC or any of the smaller versions of that.  And if it's not that, I don't see any state allowing it, not that it would really be thier business.  If you just have your heart set on getting in a fight, just do it.  Not that hard to do.

Jeff


----------



## 7starmantis (Mar 30, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> 7sm, you've hit the nail on the head right there. You are one of those [and you must be only a small percentage of the worldwide MA community] who has transitioned your training from the theoretical stage through the "proof" stage. No doubt your art may well have been effective _before_ you had that requirement to utilise it for real but then how would you have ever known? How can we all tell if what we're doing, what we're training isn't giving us a false confidence in our own abilities as fighters?


However, my transitioning was through no intent of my own. Are we to apply greater respect to those martial artists who have been so unfortunate to have been attacked and come out alive? What I propose is that "proof" can be found without the need for serious injury or "being attacked". 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> How can we all tell if what we're doing, what we're training isn't giving us a false confidence in our own abilities as fighters?


Great question, one that willl be discussed way after I am gone. I think its a matter of attitude. I dont know that it is somethin that cna be taught per se either. Its a personal effort one must take to look inside and "test" what they are doing and feeling. You must be accepting of failure, you must seek out hard work, but can you ever really "know"? I'm not sure....even after havin used my training, can I take that one experience and blanket every future experience with it?

I fully support realistic training and I even train and compete in full contact fighting, I just dont think there is a need to apply the risk of serious injury or death to the equation. We are training to keep that risk away from us, not bring it closer.

7sm


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> And here again, we return to the argument that everyone trains in martial arts primarily for self-defense?


Apologies, hehe, my knack for clarity is obviously eluding me. I can only speak for myself - but my primary motivation for practising my art is not SD. I can only assume there are others who similarly practise for other reasons than merely SD. No, I'm simply putting forth an argument that many practitioners of arts that claim an ability to enhance one's SD competence may benefit from a re-evaluation of their *actual* ability [away from the easy atmosphere of the dojo] in a real world situation.



			
				shesulsa said:
			
		

> While it is a significant reason given, I don't think there are many martial artists who walk the streets thinking, "la-aaa ti da-aahh, I'm so sa-aaafe, no one can hurt me, tum ti la la la-aaaa."


I can't say for certain but I'd reckon many actually *do* have this attitude. And many others I believe are quite happy not thinking anything at all regarding their preparedness or imagined ability in a real fight [if you've never faced it, of course your ability can be nothing other than imagined]. And I've been to and handful of schools where questioning the viability of the art in *any* capacity SD or not, is simply not regarded as good practice or proper etiquette. The pervailing servile attitude runs deep through the arts.

Come on and join us on the streets! 

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Is the only way of doing that just pure "street fighting"?


No, of course, I'm simply proffering the extreme example to make the point. However - as you're evidently well aware - when it kicks of for real, you're in an extreme situation like it or not. I don't feel one could ever train those situations in the sterile environment of a practise hall. If we want to proclaim our arts as vehicles for defense then surely we need to get our arts out on the streets. It's about walking the walk.

Where I'm from, the hoods run the streets. "Martial arts kiss my a**," they say. Round my way, the kids are tired of how the martial arts big themselves up without any real grounding in _that_ sort of street environment. I mean it's all well and good to pretty around in a hakama with your well-worn black belt on your hip, rolling on the comfort of the mats but the attitude is: come outside and show us what you can do... That's the sort of thing I'm referring to.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> The fact is, you could be the top trained fighting in the world and still loose a fight on the street,


No doubt.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> there are millions of variables that determine what takes place in a real SD fight, how do you propse to train all of them?


Same way as one might train for any unpredictable scenario: practise, practise, practise until the mental connections are solid. We're infinitely adaptible creatures and some of the greatest fighters have been also some of the greatest thinkers.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> I'm all for the spirit of what you are saying, but breaking and cutting each other up is just not the answer in my book.


7sm, no argument, I'm pleading devil's advocate simply to elevate the profile of the issue. Thanks for your input!

Respects!


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Mar 30, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> .
> 
> 
> I can't say for certain but I'd reckon many actually *do* have this attitude. And many others I believe are quite happy not thinking anything at all regarding their preparedness or imagined ability in a real fight [if you've never faced it, of course your ability can be nothing other than imagined].



If they do have this attitude, then they haven't taken thier SD lessons to heart.

Jeff


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 30, 2006)

JeffJ said:
			
		

> If they do have this attitude, then they haven't taken thier SD lessons to heart.
> 
> Jeff


JeffJ, yes that's true but then again how would we know any better - that we'd really not be so hot when it came to defending ourselves - if we've never put ourselves to the test?

I might be the best music notation reader on the planet. I might even tell myself after extensive study of keyboard dynamics that I was actually a pretty damn good _pianist_. If I never put my hands on the keyboard and play the music how would I know? Moreover I might be the sort of person who is quite happy to tell the world what a proficient pianist I am. To the extent that after a while I don't actually want to play the piano for personal fear it'd show me in a truer light.

The streets is surely where it's at?

Respects!


----------



## 7starmantis (Mar 30, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> JeffJ, yes that's true but then again how would we know any better - that we'd really not be so hot when it came to defending ourselves - if we've never put ourselves to the test?


 Ok, but what is this "test"? I dont think the only true "test" is brawling on the street. I think you can "test" yourself and your training in many different ways.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I might be the best music notation reader on the planet. I might even tell myself after extensive study of keyboard dynamics that I was actually a pretty damn good _pianist_. If I never put my hands on the keyboard and play the music how would I know? Moreover I might be the sort of person who is quite happy to tell the world what a proficient pianist I am. To the extent that after a while I don't actually want to play the piano for personal fear it'd show me in a truer light.


 I dont think "playing the music" would equate to getting in fights. For a martial artist the "playing of the music" can be done in many ways, least of all in my book is simply getting into fights around town.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> The streets is surely where it's at?


 No, I disagree. The times I have had to protect myself on the street were much shorter, less physically demanding, and over way too soon to develop alot of fear. In contrast, with my kung fu brothers I have fought much much longer, harder, been hurt alot worse, lost much more blood, been exponentially more tired and "worn out", and developed alot more "fear" of what was going to happen to me. I dont think "the street" is where its at...not at all.

7sm


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Mar 30, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> No, I disagree. The times I have had to protect myself on the street were much shorter, less physically demanding, and over way too soon to develop alot of fear. In contrast, with my kung fu brothers I have fought much much longer, harder, been hurt alot worse, lost much more blood, been exponentially more tired and "worn out", and developed alot more "fear" of what was going to happen to me. I dont think "the street" is where its at...not at all.
> 
> 7sm



Very true, I've been bloodied, worn out, and battered far worse in the dojo than I ever have in a real life fight.  If you are worried about "the street" Martial Intent, try it out there.  From the sounds of your neighborhood, it should be pretty easy.  Or, try training with people from different schools and styles.  That can be pretty eye opening.  

Jeff


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 30, 2006)

Training in the dojo is just what it is--Training. There's no comparison to a savage, knock down fight in the street and dojo fights. People in the dojo aren't trying to kill you, stab, you, rape you, pummel you etc. You should be very , very, thankful  for the short altercations, where you didn't get much damage. I've been in and see(n) many fights that go on for a time, and no dojo feeling, fight, or injury comes close. The bad intentions, and scenarios aren't there like they are in street fights.


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 31, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Ok, but what is this "test"? I dont think the only true "test" is brawling on the street. I think you can "test" yourself and your training in many different ways.


The test *is* brawling on the street. It's the test of how those of us supposedly adept at SD can actually perform in the task we've apparently trained for. The point is, if [and let's face it, it's still a statistically improbable if] and when it comes to that test, many who genuinely believe on the basis of their in-house training, that they may pass that test, will actually fail. We're progressively geared to believe we can cut it on the streets on the basis of our protracted training, our disciplined kata and our extensive randori, but at the day's end, this is largely theory.

In all this, I'm solely referring to training martial arts for SD - if you train for competition or for fitness then that's another thing altogether and not what I'm getting at.

My question is, if you train in your art for SD what scenario are you actually training for? As you say, in the dojo you can fight longer, with better form, with greater strength and more finesse - really it's the best performance all round. But if you're training in any way for SD then as you know, it's not about form and finesse, it's about directness and finishing - the only sort of training I can think that'd be akin would be some sort of sparring specifically for KO. Ultimately, I think large amounts of practise hall training and capability in SD should not be equated so readily.

And this is why I think it'll be good to get the arts claiming betterment of your SD skills out and about into the real world.

Respects!


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 31, 2006)

:asian:


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 31, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Training in the dojo is just what it is--Training. There's no comparison to a savage, knock down fight in the street and dojo fights. People in the dojo aren't trying to kill you, stab, you, rape you, pummel you etc.


Exactly. But what happens after you've been training your SD all those years, increasingly firm in the belief that you can rightly handle yourself. What happens then when someone is actually trying to stab or rape you? I'd say few if any arts would claim to provide no SD benefits - it's inherent in the very nature of martial art. Unfortunately the SD tenets of our arts have the notion ingrained in us that we are prepared for a real battle when actually, we're not. As you say, dojo and real world are not comparable. And this is the crux of the matter - that many of us believe our sparring skill is translatable to the outside world.

I think it'd benefit us all to get out there. Naturally, I think it'd be way too much of a shake up in our beliefs though and too radical of thought to consider something as outlandish as the Bar Brawl Evangelism. Of course it's a contrived situation to make a point but nevertheless, even if all objections are covered [as in the initial post] few would care to challenge themselves or their art.

Most of us are *complacent* in our beliefs that the SD training in our arts has merit in the real world.

Come join us on the streets!! It'll be an awakening for us all and for our arts.

Respects!


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 31, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> The test *is* brawling on the street. It's the test of how those of us supposedly adept at SD can actually perform in the task we've apparently trained for. The point is, if [and let's face it, it's still a statistically improbable if] and when it comes to that test, many who genuinely believe on the basis of their in-house training, that they may pass that test, will actually fail. We're progressively geared to believe we can cut it on the streets on the basis of our protracted training, our disciplined kata and our extensive randori, but at the day's end, this is largely theory.
> 
> Yes it is indeed! I don't know how many martial artists i've seen get handeled, rather easily, for real. You can't simulate that training.


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 31, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Exactly. But what happens after you've been training your SD all those years, increasingly firm in the belief that you can rightly handle yourself. What happens then when someone is actually trying to stab or rape you? I'd say few if any arts would claim to provide no SD benefits - it's inherent in the very nature of martial art. Unfortunately the SD tenets of our arts have the notion ingrained in us that we are prepared for a real battle when actually, we're not. As you say, dojo and real world are not comparable. And this is the crux of the matter - that many of us believe our sparring skill is translatable to the outside world.
> 
> I think it'd benefit us all to get out there. Naturally, I think it'd be way too much of a shake up in our beliefs though and too radical of thought to consider something as outlandish as the Bar Brawl Evangelism. Of course it's a contrived situation to make a point but nevertheless, even if all objections are covered [as in the initial post] few would care to challenge themselves or their art.
> 
> ...


 
That's all I was getting at. I was agreeing with you. You should train hard in the dojo, to prepare the best that you can for a real SD situation. But, you're right, the only way to know is to do it. I came up in the streets, and am still there, at work too. I get into it and have done so many times over. The training, if done with the right mind set in preparation for the real stuff (if that's your thing) will work for you.


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 31, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Yes it is indeed! I don't know how many martial artists i've seen get handeled, rather easily, for real. You can't simulate that training.


Exactly my friend. I know it's an old chestnut and I've mentioned it earlier, but Bruce Lee was notorious for picking fights on the streets of HK in his formative years. OK, so it can be argued that he was nothing more than a miscreant at that stage but few can argue over what he became. I believe this street-fighting was inherent in producing not only a fighter but a *thinker* of Bruce Lee's standing [and no, I'm not a JKD practitioner ]. 

Undoubtedly it was dangerous, ol' Bruce could have never survived to become the icon he did, but that's the point. Real world fights are dangerous, the adrenaline surge is an incredible aid to clarity of thought but if one has never experienced this situation then how does one know how to correctly utilise this natural response let alone respond to the attack?

Now, I'm not belittling the training we all do in our clubs and schools, I'm simply suggesting that many of us may do well to re-evaluate exactly what we do know of SD and real world fight situations and exactly how far our apparent SD skill would stretch when trouble kicks off.

I say it's the very fact of this acute street-fight "training" being out of your comfort zone ie. out from under the wing of the rules that would exponentially increase our real-world fighting skill - and in doing so would, through this Bar Brawl Evangelism, potentially bring back many to the martial arts. 

Question: a street corner, a 250lb gangsta with a 7 inch blade surprise attacks an unprepared "empty hand" 100lb female martial artist. Who wins? Seems like a no brainer...

Question: a street corner, a 250lb gangsta with a 7 inch blade attacks an "empty hand" 100lb female martial artist who has time-spent fighting on the street, adapting to situations, rolling with the punches, adept and *experienced* at handling and defending against live blades *for real*, with *practical* live and first-hand knowledge of key strike points etc. etc. etc. Where would you put your money this time?

The outcome may be the came in both cases but as a martial artist we do ourselves no favors by being complicit in the attrition of our skeptical beliefs - I mean we start training SD thinking "how can I ever beat a guy with a weapon and 100lb on me?" but gradually through our training we have our natural skepticism eroded - we believe what we do on the mats is effective despite the fact that we *personally* have never proven it's effectiveness to us - and so it goes until the one day we're utterly convinced of our preparedness and bam! we're attacked and have no notion how to react to the truly dangerous, unpredicted and unwarranted attack.

Let's get out there...



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> the only way to know is to do it.


Yup, it's a tragedy that the first chance many of us have to prove we actually *can't* cut it, is our last...

Respects!


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 31, 2006)

We are out there! I think that those of us that take the reality approach did so before joining a dojo and training. I think it's what drove us to get into a dojo, and train. I have found it was always our kind that questions techniques, and works with them to get them ready. It's the "beleivers" that get the rude awakening (hopefully, they're still around after to have learned something and put it to use). I also came up in "the old school", where, self defense was the focus! The commercialization over the years has eroded this for most.


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 31, 2006)

By the way your screen name is what it should be about in my opinion. Take care of that first, than all of the benefits of the other stuff will come into play, for real.


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 31, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> We are out there! I think that those of us that take the reality approach did so before joining a dojo and training. I think it's what drove us to get into a dojo, and train. I have found it was always our kind that questions techniques, and works with them to get them ready. It's the "beleivers" that get the rude awakening (hopefully, they're still around after to have learned something and put it to use). I also came up in "the old school", where, self defense was the focus! The commercialization over the years has eroded this for most.


I agree, the reality approach has gone and just as my Bar Brawl Evangelism is an utterly contrived situation, so too is the SD approach within our martial arts training. I mean, we're training for eventualities we hope will never happen [fair enough] but we're often training and dealing in irrelevancies for eventualities which, when they do happen, we're simply not equipped.

I mean, that's one thing - as you've mentioned earlier, it's nigh on impossible to train *every* situation, let alone most of the seriously dangerous ones - and furthermore, training and *doing* aren't equivalent. But for me, the problem lies in the notion that what we've trained in SD somehow sheds us of our shortcomings. If as martial artists, we can't step back and take stock of what we can and can't do, some of us may needlessly bring trouble down on our heads. I say the best way to evaluate our SD skill is in a live situation, hence the mobile-ring "outreach" that I'm hypothesising.

Fear can be a bad thing...
Folk don't like getting hurt so we make great efforts to avoid that when training.
Schools don't like dancing with the compensation culture so we go easy and hold back on the techniques...

The result is the dilution from the highest peaks of our arts at their inception into the new ego-flattering systems created by many breakaway instructors and more annoyingly most of our traditional arts gone the way -as you say- of the dirty denaro. In this day and age, old-school is the new radicalism!

It's difficult to admit to fear and certainly, fear isn't always faced in the practise hall. I believe it's conveniently swept under the mats and hidden amongst the techniques. We need a stance that says, yes if you're training SD, you may get hurt - I take it further and say if you're training SD, you NEED to get hurt. If we aren't prepared to be in danger and we aren't prepared to be hurt then at the very least we -and our schools who take that attitude- should neither be thinking of ourselves or proclaiming ourselves as having efficacy in the SD arena.

OK, so my Bar Brawl Evangelism is far out [though I think it has merit ] but assuming I'm unable to sell the idea to my venture capitalist brethren, I'll ask, what's the best vehicle for training SD? And how might it be practically implemented or will it always be of necessity an "underground" fight club.

Respects!


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 31, 2006)

No, Your bar brawl thing isn't that far out. I agree with it! One can get real experience there, or a real awakening. From my beginnings, I was always advised to getinto an industry where one could try their stuff out for real, legally. Club/bar security is a great tool for that. You get a dose of what works for you, and if you get into trouble, you have help--LOL! (After a while, too, you'll get over the fear of encounters.)

I say take your Aikido training the way you get in class, but, away from the dojo, add the reality touch to it! Look at Steven Seagal's way of doing it! If it's too soft, take up a Kempo/Kenpo system, or militaristic style!

As for the capitalists, I've been fighting this for years, beleive me! They'll never buy the pain, and train hard way, they'll lose studets, which leads to loss of money. 

Hey, listen, Your not getting any argument from me on this, I support you.


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Mar 31, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> From my beginnings, I was always advised to getinto an industry where one could try their stuff out for real, legally. Club/bar security is a great tool for that. You get a dose of what works for you, and if you get into trouble, you have help--LOL! (After a while, too, you'll get over the fear of encounters.)



I ended up getting into a job that did the same for me, even though I didn't expect it too.  While an animal control officer it seemed that about every two weeks someone would take offense at me and attack.  Great leaning experience.

MartialIntent, I really like the different way you presented this debate.  Added a little energey to it instead of the same tired old arguments and I agree with a lot of what you are saying.  IMO, if someone wants to be sure about thier SD cappabilites, they need to take matters into thier own hands.  Will all the liability and insurance problems many schools face today, many instructors just won't add the realism that would be of benifit to thier students.  Many ways to do this,  Hand Swords suggestion about being a bouncer is great.


----------



## 7starmantis (Mar 31, 2006)

The only problem with this is that your making a few huge assumptions in your debate. First is that "the street" is some magical place where training has no merit, where superhuman "gangstas" attack with speed and power not known to normal human beings. Where the legalities of the fights make them have some kind of pull or respect over fights performed under supervision and coaching. This place has some mystic force field that zaps muscle memory, training, and common sense. Where the very nature of fighting is progressed through death and lost blood. Where those who have engaged in its fights have gained and learned more in a few fights than a martial artist could in 30 or 40 years of training. The second is that training done within the walls of a school is somehow lacking and connot cover or deal with real life situations. Your assuming that training done in a school is soft, slow, unrealistic, and lazy.

While I am in no way trying to downplay the seriousness of pure self defense fighting and I'm not trying to say that some schools dont train poorly and lazily, I simply do not believe that "the street" holds some force that invalidates my training. What your overlooking is real alive self defense training that goes on in the halls of many, many schools throughout the world. Fighting on "the street" is dangerous and leaves no room for mistakes, but your training should follow the same mold. Again, its all about your attitude as you train. If your goofing off staring at the hot chick in front of you then your right, but if you approach your training seriously and address real self defense, you can train yourself to be ready for "the street". 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Training in the dojo is just what it is--Training. There's no comparison to a savage, knock down fight in the street and dojo fights. People in the dojo aren't trying to kill you, stab, you, rape you, pummel you etc. You should be very , very, thankful for the short altercations, where you didn't get much damage. I've been in and see(n) many fights that go on for a time, and no dojo feeling, fight, or injury comes close. The bad intentions, and scenarios aren't there like they are in street fights.


 First, your getting caught up in semantics of the words being used. While I agree that words can create and set a mood, thats why we use words like combat, life or death, etc. Your again assuming a certain type of training and applying it to all training. In my training we dont use words like "sparring" or "playing hands" its "combat". You should create the same scenarios in your training that you could encounter outsdie it. The actual intent of my attacker isn't going to change the way I combat him (if it does your training is lacking). I've seen many, many street fights and such as a paramedic in Houston Texas, but I have to propose that if your "street fight" ranges on beyond say a minute or two, you should really look at your training again. I'm not talking about "street fights" where the two are trying to beat down each other or establish dominance, but where I'm going for eyes, knees, etc. Anything else is a mistake on this magical "street" your discussing. If the scenarios and such aren't there in training, maybe you should ask "why".



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> My question is, if you train in your art for SD what scenario are you actually training for? As you say, in the dojo you can fight longer, with better form, with greater strength and more finesse - really it's the best performance all round. But if you're training in any way for SD then as you know, it's not about form and finesse, it's about directness and finishing - the only sort of training I can think that'd be akin would be some sort of sparring specifically for KO. Ultimately, I think large amounts of practise hall training and capability in SD should not be equated so readily.


 I didn't say anything about strength, better form, or finesse. While I agree with what your saying, I dont think its right to apply it to all training, I think you would be surprised at what goes on in some schools. As for the KO, that is not the ultimate objective of self defense, thats only one menas to the end. The objective is to go home alive and in one piece if possible. I think the point is to look at your training (if your training for SD) and make it as realistic as possible, the point is not in my opinion to go get in life threatening situations to "test" your resolve. If you can't test yourself outside that situation I would propose that you may not pass the test you put yourself in. 

The bottom line is that the street holds no powers that are absent from the four walls of a school. Alive serious training is a must in SD training. I will also say that approaching a self defense scenario from a sparring standpoint will probably get you killed, but I would *not* say that its not possible to prepare yourself for a real self defense situation without putting yourself in one. Thats absurd. It all goes back to you and how you train. While it is easy for training to become lax and soft, it takes a serious effort to keep it alive and real. I have seen nothing to date that makes me think its impossible for me to prepare myself within my own training. I've used my training several times to protect myself...I have looked at my training and I serious do not think I was just lucky, I see the benefits of my training in my fighting.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that "the street" does hold dangers but those dangers are not something impossible to train for.

7sm


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Mar 31, 2006)

Wow.  That is, hands down, the best argument I've ever heard in this endless debate.  Kudos 7.

Jeff


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 31, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> The only problem with this is that your making a few huge assumptions in your debate. First is that "the street" is some magical place where training has no merit, where superhuman "gangstas" attack with speed and power not known to normal human beings.


7sm, many thanks for the contribution to the debate. 

OK, first off, the street is not a magickal place - a sentiment to which I do not recall alluding to. The street is a nice, safe place to hang out - _statistically_ speaking - but if you pay any heed to your newspapers the truth would appear to lie completely contrary to such statistics. The streets have potential to be highly and mortally dangerous. Alas, some of us I believe are so swamped in our own complacency and martial conceit that we edge ever closer to failure of acknowledgement of these dangers, trusting instead our own [unproven] SD training.

Again, I'm not belittling anyone's training. What I'm saying is that gauging one's performance in an real altercation can at best be guesswork, without ever testing one's mettle in the live situation.

Gangstas, superhuman? Who said that? The simple fact is that where a gangsta may differ from you or I is in their intent to follow through. I use the term "gangsta" to pinpoint a stereotypical street hoodlum. OK, let's be honest, he may be chap who may well have no skill and he may well _not_ be 250 lb of muscle, but he is proven willing to carry through an intent to filch your purse or wallet [or worse] and back up that intent with action and commitment. I'm sure of course, there are many pleasant and jovial gangstas out there helping their communities  Apologies to our gangsta brethren for any gratuitous stereotyping...



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> This place has some mystic force field that zaps muscle memory, training, and common sense. Where the very nature of fighting is progressed through death and lost blood. Where those who have engaged in its fights have gained and learned more in a few fights than a martial artist could in 30 or 40 years of training.


Again, nope. Nothing mystic about this place. At its most primal though, it's a place where anyone with intent can attack you with neither fear or concern for damaging you or killing you, nor of actual retribution from you or punishment from the law. *These* are the things you can never train in the dojo.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> The second is that training done within the walls of a school is somehow lacking and connot cover or deal with real life situations.


Indeed it is lacking. To my knowledge, no _genuine_ martial arts student ever tried to kill another student within the walls of a school. As extreme as it sounds, *that* is why this training is lacking.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Your assuming that training done in a school is soft, slow, unrealistic, and lazy.


I have had the pleasure to train in many practise halls. Seldom have I encountered one where students do not give 100% commitment to their sparring or randori. But yes I am saying to a great extent it's unrealistic simply because in a sterile environment it's impossible to train for a live SD situation. We can approximate certainly, though often our approximations are borne out of ignorance and are not representative of techniques [for want of a better word] that real attackers use to achieve their goal. Choke holds and bear hugs? Heck in my art we train for wrist grabs, LOL. All of these have their place within their arts but not as part of an effective SD strategy.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> While I am in no way trying to downplay the seriousness of pure self defense fighting and I'm not trying to say that some schools dont train poorly and lazily, I simply do not believe that "the street" holds some force that invalidates my training. What your overlooking is real alive self defense training that goes on in the halls of many, many schools throughout the world. Fighting on "the street" is dangerous and leaves no room for mistakes, but your training should follow the same mold.


This is my point exactly, that fighting on the street *is* dangerous and more pertinently, does leave no room for mistakes. I mean, what's the very worst that can happen to you when sparring full contact? A bloody nose? A broken toe? At the end, your sparring partner has concern for your injuries, as do your compadres. It's by no means a hostile situation. 

You're completely correct in saying that training should be such that it doesn't allow for mistakes but heck, make a mistake in your randori session and well, nobody gets killed...



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Again, its all about your attitude as you train. If your goofing off staring at the hot chick in front of you then your right, but if you approach your training seriously and address real self defense, you can train yourself to be ready for "the street".


I'd *so* like to believe this. For me, what happens on the mats and what happens when someone lunges at you with the half smashed neck of a beer bottle are a million miles apart and not so lazily reconcilable.

The problem is that all through our MA training as we progress through the ranks, building our ring or mat experience and developing our skill and speed, we're deluding our subconscious into believing we are ready for the street as though this "safe" test-tube skillset will automatically translate into workable live fighting competency. For me, I don't believe this is the case. I had my skillset disproven to me somewhere around the middle of my martial career to date, and it forced a rethink of what I _thought_ I knew and of how good a fighter I _thought_ I was.

I think there really is an odor of complacency and conceit that hangs heavy over SD practices in the martial community. Some pay nothing more than lip service to SD techniques. Some are happily ignorant dealing in irrelevancies but ultimately it's the prevailing attitude of vanity and self-satisfaction with our SD systems that are convincing us that the training we have somehow elevates us above the level of street hoodlums. 

Many of us may do well to take up the Bar Brawl Evangelism challenge and get out and about a bit more. 



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> I guess what I'm trying to say is that "the street" does hold dangers but those dangers are not something impossible to train for.


I genuinely wish you well.

Respects!


----------



## lonecoyote (Mar 31, 2006)

My last street fight, shortly before I quit drinking (no coincidence) - I reached out to shake hands, and whack! I caught a sucker punch right to the jaw, it shook me up and he landed a couple more before I caught and started dropping bombs. We both did a lot of damage, we clinched, went to the ground. I had a guillotine, couldn't sink it, he was mounted, couldn't move though. We stopped. Drunk, hurt, tired, and embarrased. It was ugly, stupid, and I didn't learn a damned thing except not to shake hands with that guy. I was cut bad over the eye, bleeding from the mouth, he was hurt too. Lost a couple of friends and a favorite hangout. All of this in my late twenties no less, when I should have known better. Stupid, meaningless, ridiculous streetfighting. You can have it, it's for kids, drunks, and the socially retarded. Street predators look for prey, not street fights, so you're trying to compare apples and oranges anyway.


----------



## MartialIntent (Mar 31, 2006)

lonecoyote said:
			
		

> My last street fight, shortly before I quit drinking (no coincidence) - I reached out to shake hands, and whack! I caught a sucker punch right to the jaw, it shook me up and he landed a couple more before I caught and started dropping bombs. We both did a lot of damage, we clinched, went to the ground. I had a guillotine, couldn't sink it, he was mounted, couldn't move though. We stopped. Drunk, hurt, tired, and embarrased. It was ugly, stupid, and I didn't learn a damned thing except not to shake hands with that guy. I was cut bad over the eye, bleeding from the mouth, he was hurt too. Lost a couple of friends and a favorite hangout. All of this in my late twenties no less, when I should have known better. Stupid, meaningless, ridiculous streetfighting. You can have it, it's for kids, drunks, and the socially retarded. Street predators look for prey, not street fights, so you're trying to compare apples and oranges anyway.


Yep, a great many martial artists would end up the same way, lolling in a pool of their own AB negative. The problem is that many of those same martial artists may have otherwise convinced themselves - and in fact been subject to protracted martial indoctrination, to have them truly believe they could have actually cut it in an unfortunate case like this. 

Apples and oranges? Mmmmm...

Respects!


----------



## lonecoyote (Mar 31, 2006)

Well, I did cut it. I survived, and so you, could you have done much better, evangelist, what could you learn with your mock staged streetfights that would have given you what it takes, to do better than I, or better than any one, martial artist or otherwise? How could your ideas about training protect you any better than traditional training. I hit hard and so did he, two strong, stubborn and stupid men. You wouldn't have done much better against either of us. Sounds like you're thinking of selling a little snake oil yourself, like the ads in the back of a certain magazine "UNREALISTIC TRAINING WILL GET YOU KILLED! LEARN THE SECRETS OF REAL STREETFIGHTING!" They shout. Been there for years, this is nothing new. Apples and oranges are both nutritious and delicious, I enjoy them too.


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Mar 31, 2006)

It's like saying since that is US Army isn't prepared because thier force on force training doesn't use live ammunition.  In the dojo, we do train for "the street".  Can we cover all the bases there? No.  Can we plan for every contingency? No.  But we can train to the best of our abilites and condition our bodies and minds to be as ready as possible.

Is SD the only reason I train in the martial arts? No, I also train for fitness, the cameraderie, and for the sheer joy of it.  

And check your local laws.  I think to be truly prepared, you should also carry some sort of weapon.  Be it pepper spray, a colapsable  baton, a firearm, or what have you.  Any of those could greatly increase your survivability in an unexpected altercation.  A true SD altercation, not some ridulous fight, which we should be mature enough not to get involved in the first place.

Jeff


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 1, 2006)

JeffJ said:
			
		

> It's like saying since that is US Army isn't prepared because thier force on force training doesn't use live ammunition. In the dojo, we do train for "the street". Can we cover all the bases there? No. Can we plan for every contingency? No. But we can train to the best of our abilites and condition our bodies and minds to be as ready as possible.


It's not that the army isn't prepared, a more accurate hypothesis might be that those troops who have _not_ seen action in the live theatre before are perhaps not as prepared as those veterans who have. One of the saddest testaments to this is the oft-cited Vietnam war which failed so many young and courageous troops who may have previously had faith in their preparedness.



			
				JeffJ said:
			
		

> Is SD the only reason I train in the martial arts? No, I also train for fitness, the cameraderie, and for the sheer joy of it.


Me too. The arts give us so much and have potential to bring us to deeper knowledge of ourselves mentally, spiritually and physically, but where they often fail us is in teaching of SD techniques which are far removed form those envisioned by the founding fathers of the arts. We may well be faster, slicker and safer in our practices compared to those feudal times in centuries long past but we have diluted our SD techniques from the pinnacle of self-protection into nothing more than demonstration.

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 1, 2006)

lonecoyote said:
			
		

> Well, I did cut it. I survived, and so you, could you have done much better, evangelist, what could you learn with your mock staged streetfights that would have given you what it takes, to do better than I, or better than any one, martial artist or otherwise? How could your ideas about training protect you any better than traditional training. I hit hard and so did he, two strong, stubborn and stupid men. You wouldn't have done much better against either of us. Sounds like you're thinking of selling a little snake oil yourself, like the ads in the back of a certain magazine "UNREALISTIC TRAINING WILL GET YOU KILLED! LEARN THE SECRETS OF REAL STREETFIGHTING!" They shout. Been there for years, this is nothing new. Apples and oranges are both nutritious and delicious, I enjoy them too.


lonecoyote, don't for goodness sake be taking this as a tirade at any personal level - that's not my intention. If I have offended you I am sorry. 

This is all hypothetical. I'm no charlatan or peddler [how could I be with an idea like this??? Come on! I mean...] and though I'd never be so conceited as to see this concept as visionary, I'm merely using it to illustrate the idea that what's being taught within the sterile confines of our dojo walls cannot by definition be *automatically* transferred into the real world.

I'm not saying your training or my training will not apply to the street, I'm saying that we cannot AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME what works on the mats will work when someone doesn't flash a blade about in your face but rather runs up behind you and plunges it straight into your kidneys.

Again sorry if any of the preceding comment gave you cause for offense.

Respects!


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Apr 1, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I'm not saying your training or my training will not apply to the street, I'm saying that we cannot AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME what works on the mats will work when someone doesn't flash a blade about in your face but rather runs up behind you and plunges it straight into your kidneys.



Of course we cannot Automatically Assume what we train in will always work.  But could the people who founded our arts do that?  I'm sure this debate is centuries old.  Sure, they might have gone out and tried thier technique against others, but there was always the spectre of defeat when they did, just like today.  

Our SD training nothing more than demonstration?  For some it might be. But once again, it's not the technique, the style, or who tought you, it's the person weilding the technique that matters most.  In training for SD, you still must have the will and the drive to make the techniques effective.  Are there situations that even the best training won't be able to handle?  Of course there are, but that does not negate the utility of training.

Jeff


----------



## shesulsa (Apr 1, 2006)

Street brawling and bar brawling is not the same thing as self-defense.

I train in martial arts to, among other things, learn:  1. How to avoid physical conflict and 2. How to handle conflict should I find myself in it with no way to avoid it.

To me, hitting the street to train is brawling, pure and simple. It means a person has something to prove - a chip on one's shoulder, a neglect of belief in oneself and a lack of value placed in certain training methods.

I don't want to get hit with a soft stick in training because as far as I'm concerned, it could be a knife or broken bottle.  

I don't want to get smacked softly because that means I could get smacked firmly. 

If I'm going to get attacked IRL, I don't want to test my weapon evasion and see how much I can toy with the attacker, I don't want to duke it out, I don't care to try my jumping back kick ... I WANT IT OVER!!!  FAST!!!

If martial artists take that attitude to your bar brawl, people will wind up in the hospital quite possibly to include the artist.  And ... all this proves what?  And to whom? Why?

If a person wants to brawl to prove something to themselves or other people, that's not martial arts and it's not self-defense.  It's brawling - fight club, street fighting ... as another person put it, 'ego'.  It's not about self-protection.

That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 1, 2006)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> Street brawling and bar brawling is not the same thing as self-defense.


Exactly. SD is a set of techniques and theories that we train and practise in the vacuum of our dojos, dojangs, clubs, schools and practise halls. Street fighting on the other hand, is the mortally dangerous situation one is involuntarily *forced* into to keep oneself alive and unharmed.

Only a fool fights voluntarily on the street. I mean, call me naive but I had sort of assumed we'd all be on the same page regarding the fact I'm citing Bar Brawl Evangelism merely as a far-flung hypothetical and purely illustrative situation, right? We *do* all realize that, right?

What we learn from our Martial arts SD may or may not assist us in an attack but really, that's not the heart of my point. That point being that we've come to hail our martial arts SD strategies and skills as the _epitome_ of real world defense. And amazingly all this martial arts SD knowledge has been attained and drawn not from our experience on a feudal battlefield from aeons gone by, not from our action in theatres of war, not from our running battles in riotous crowd control situations, not even from our bar brawling [and I'm speaking generally, as I know many serving forces and LEOs have won their real world experience the hard way ie. iTRW]. Nope, for martial arts lay-fighters, all this wonderfully sanctified martial arts SD experience and knowledge that we hold in such high esteem has been drawn from hammering out techniques against a bag and from compliant ukes and from friendly sparring partners. At no stage during the accumulation of this wealth of "workable" martial SD technique and learning has anyone tried to hurt, maim or kill anyone else. For all that though, we're still adamantly, ahem... _more-or-less_ certain we'll be ok if it happens for real. Hmmmm... Well I don't buy it. But don't sweat it, that's just my opinion and I'm sticking to it 

Respects!


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Apr 1, 2006)

One thing to keep in mind is, that if you don't have confidence in your technique, there is no force in the universe that will make it work in a rl situation.

Jeff


----------



## FearlessFreep (Apr 1, 2006)

Good point, Jeff

One thng  that training in MA and in SD has taught me also is that the unknown is always there.  I'm not a lot more aware of what can go wrong.  I have confidence in my trainingg and my techniques and believe that, skill-on-skill, I could handle myself if need be.  I also know that Murphy's Law and the unforseen show up often enough not  to want to press my luck un-neccessarily


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 1, 2006)

Thanks to each and every one of you for expressing your opinions - all very interesting reading and I think I can take something away also!

OK, to me, some of you get the idea, some don't wish to question the martial doctrines in which you have been raised, and others simply don't care. Fair enough, all opinions are equally welcome and valid in my house. But rather than having us stuck in the defensive loop, let me provide another alternative... I mean Evangelism I've called it but I'm seeking no converts, I'm just trying to challenge y'all to think seriously about how well you're prepared for the worst.

Righto then, let me suggest another, perhaps more palatable means [though no less outlandish in many a book] of not so much testing your ability in the actual live fight situation but rather of enhancing your *preparedness* for that situation. Ability per se and preparedness: two parts of the same SD coin.

And I'm not referring to SD preparedness in the manner of keeping your eyes and ears open and avoiding a confrontation, I'm referring instead to how you physically react to changes in bodily chemistry and physiology when suddenly thrust into a life-and-death defensive situation - because make no bones, when you're attacked with a blade [for example] there's no time to pigeonhole what's happening to you as either a mortal or non-mortal threat - all sudden attacks are instinctively life-and-death situations.

My suggestion then would be a twofold strategy of firstly utilizing and focussing on the experience you have already and secondly building upon it.

So how's that done? And what "experience" am I talking about? Well, who has ever suddenly skidded their car on ice or been in a serious auto accident? Who has ever fallen downstairs? Who has ever gotten their head stuck between the bars of a fence as a kid? Badly cut themselves on a kitchen knife or broken a major bone maybe? I'm talking specifically about those situations not where there are great amounts of assistance and you can wail and faint hopelessly, but rather those when you've instantly got to cope yourself.

As an illustration, I recall two major incidents. Firstly having just received my driver's licence, I took my dad's car one night without his consent and rolled it onto it's roof in a field and secondly in one of my first jobs when hurriedly finishing a client's artwork, I removed the tip of my finger and half of my fingernail with a commercial guillotine.

I'm certain you recall your own similar and worse situations where panic is utterly inappropriate and you've got to cope because you may be your only source of help.

I'm certain if you've ever encountered any of these scenarios you *WILL* have clear recall and more importantly, your instantaneous reactions to them will have been imprinted into your psyche. I believe this process is by design and not by accident. I believe our subconscious "locks down" the recall of our physical reactions to these incidents in our lives so clearly in order for us to be able to draw upon them as subsequently required.

Now, as odd as it initially sounds, I believe focussing upon how we *immediately* reacted in these situations, how we instinctively handled ourselves physically and what our instant coping mechanisms were, ultimately gives us more of an indication of our preparedness for a real attack than hours of largely theoretical randori on the mats.

OK, so what about building upon this foundation? Well, that's simple and many of you probably already have made your own progress... I'm talking off the top of my head about solo climbing [no partner, no ropes], caving, skydiving, moto-X jumping, off-piste skiing, downhill MTBing, free-diving and any of the the myriad other activities in which you don't have a metaphorical [or literal] safety net. They are activities in which at any stage, you could end up in serious trouble. I think anyone interested in building upon that instantaneous and instinctive SD preparedness might consider these activities as well as trad SD training in the martial school.

Sparring on the mats simply contains no elements of genuine foreboding danger and while you're undoubtedly training techniques which -credit due- may benefit you in a real attack, having your entire SD portfolio of coping mechanisms based solely on sparring and technque training is neither a balanced nor a holistic approach.

I'm aware few of us like to be challenged in our beliefs. Regarding SD in our martial arts, we believe unquestioningly in what we're told, taught and what we read with neither convincing personal proof of its efficacy nor genuine experience of its application and we'll readily, and often aggressively, defend our beliefs to all comers and objectors. In this respect, many of us are little better than advocates any of the ancient, vociferous and ominously totalitarian world religions. 

But stop, think and perhaps set the dogmatism aside for a minute. I've really got no one to convince. I'm on no crusade, I'm just talking here with the genuine intent of challenging a martial ideology that from what I'm hearing [and what I've experienced] is hoisted up as being beyond question. If an SD system is beyond question it belongs in the realms of the despot and to my knowledge, none of the great artists who formulated our wonderful arts were of any such mind... 

Respects!


----------



## lonecoyote (Apr 1, 2006)

Respect to you, too! I certainly took no offense and appreciate your viewpoints and understand where you're coming from. I do believe that working w/out a net in any endeavor will harden resolve, in fact, how could it help but do so. A couple of points to consider-Many dojos are more hardcore than you think. I knew a guy who would hold classes for kids, had an after school program, etc. and a successful adults class w/ lots of friendly folks who were into helping each other acheive their best, which is how a successful commercial dojo should be run. Friday nights about 9:30 after the adult TKD class was getting ready to go home, the storm clouds would gather, some guys in Gis, someguys just wearing shorts, Tshirts, and carrying mouthpieces, turned into a completely different place. Still a good place, but much different. I've seen the same thing in some Satuday and Sunday sparring only classes and other late night classes. Not all martial artists stick strictly to a certain dogma, and you can find more than a few places where students and instructors together are taking things very, very close to real fighting. Now, how to put your ideas into practice-How about short fights, prearranged in a park, vacant lot, empty street, beach, etc, day or night. Set short time limits to keep things fast and yet limit the amount of punishment. Rotate fighters often. Fast, fast, fast, then jump in the van, drive somewhere else and do it again. Take two cars, make teams. Or work scenarios, 2vs.1, armed vs. unarmed. Is that your kind of idea? Give us a little more of what you would have us do, its pretty easy to run something down, but what do you want to create instead?


----------



## 7starmantis (Apr 1, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> The street is a nice, safe place to hang out - _statistically_ speaking - but if you pay any heed to your newspapers the truth would appear to lie completely contrary to such statistics. The streets have potential to be highly and mortally dangerous. Alas, some of us I believe are so swamped in our own complacency and martial conceit that we edge ever closer to failure of acknowledgement of these dangers, trusting instead our own [unproven] SD training.


 I completely agree, I think there are many martial artist who are swamped in their own complacency but I simply dont think that is the fate of all martial artists. Also, I disagree with your use of the word unproven. While you may be speaking from your own personal experiences which may have been in schools that left you unproven that is not the case in all indoor training. Im sorry, thats just absurd. What kind of proof would you offer to support that kind of statement? Also remember that I have used my indoor training to protect myself on the street. One thing that was brought up a few posts back is the ability to escape a violent confrontation, if you think that is not SD you are terribly wrong. Now I understand your point here is fighting and we can assume we are talking about after de-escalation has failed, but your simply blanketing in the same way the people you are talking about are. You are so strongly convinced of your point that you blanket that point to every martial artist at the same time you warn against blanketing their training to cover SD.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Again, I'm not belittling anyone's training. What I'm saying is that gauging one's performance in an real altercation can at best be guesswork, without ever testing one's mettle in the live situation.


 Again, while you have a point its not complete. On some technical level I can agree that training is theoretical on the sense of intent of the attacker. However, if this alters the way in which you train, maybe you should seek out different training partners. There are those out there interested in alive realistic training. What exactly would you list as different from in doors training to live situations? What makes the difference? Because like it or not, you will fight the way in which you train and while that usually has a negative connotation it can have a very positive one as well. If I train seriously and realistically enough, there need not be any change in my behavior from training to live combat. Im not sure how you train but I train quite a bit in full contact combat and I want to do it then exactly as I would on the amazing streets. Guess whatI do. Im missing your point as to what is so different. I see the intent being different, and the adrenaline and situations, but why do you believe that automatically dissolves your training?



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> The simple fact is that where a gangsta may differ from you or I is in their intent to follow through. I use the term "gangsta" to pinpoint a stereotypical street hoodlum. OK, let's be honest, he may be chap who may well have no skill and he may well _not_ be 250 lb of muscle, but he is proven willing to carry through an intent to filch your purse or wallet [or worse] and back up that intent with action and commitment. I'm sure of course, there are many pleasant and jovial gangstas out there helping their communities
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Ok, Ill try to lay this out as best I can. The way I perform in training is not contingent on anyone elses actions or intentions. If your training is lacking follow through, I would advise seeking out different training. I think the issue is your bad experiences with martial arts, but dont be naïve enough to apply those experiences to all martial artists. 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Again, nope. Nothing mystic about this place. At its most primal though, it's a place where anyone with intent can attack you with neither fear or concern for damaging you or killing you, nor of actual retribution from you or punishment from the law. *These* are the things you can never train in the dojo.


 Here I think is the problem with your romanticization of the streets. While I dont propose blind faith in your skills I must also not support blind faith in your would be attackers feelings, thoughts, or concerns. While you can not train in your school against a person who disregards your safety altogether (arguably) what does that disregard do for the attacker? What does it offer them that gives them the edge on you? Because bottom line, if Im attacked, I have no regard for their safety whatsoever. I train to unleash as violent an attack as humanly possible, we often say to turn on such violence as to scare a serial killer. This is a part of my system and training, I dont think a disregard for my personal safety gives a would be attacker a physical edge over meand Ive proven that.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I have had the pleasure to train in many practise halls. Seldom have I encountered one where students do not give 100% commitment to their sparring or randori. But yes I am saying to a great extent it's unrealistic simply because in a sterile environment it's impossible to train for a live SD situation. We can approximate certainly, though often our approximations are borne out of ignorance and are not representative of techniques [for want of a better word] that real attackers use to achieve their goal. Choke holds and bear hugs? Heck in my art we train for wrist grabs, LOL. All of these have their place within their arts but not as part of an effective SD strategy.


 Once again I must advise looking at your own training then. Remember, I do not take part in sparring or randori.I think your taking one type of training and trying to apply it to everyone. First, I disagree that wrist grabs do not have their place in SD. Second, I must yet again refer you to your own experiences with SD training. If your training has included ignorant and unrealistic scenarios, Im sorry but you simply cant try to say all SD training follows the same mold.you would be horribly mistaken. I see what your point is based on and I agree, we cannot ever really apply all possible variants to SD training, but your placing such unrealistic importance on these variables. The attackers intent shouldnt change my actions, if it does you may need to check your training. 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> This is my point exactly, that fighting on the street *is* dangerous and more pertinently, does leave no room for mistakes. I mean, what's the very worst that can happen to you when sparring full contact? A bloody nose? A broken toe? At the end, your sparring partner has concern for your injuries, as do your compadres. It's by no means a hostile situation.
> 
> You're completely correct in saying that training should be such that it doesn't allow for mistakes but heck, make a mistake in your randori session and well, nobody gets killed...


 Actually I dont even really know what randori is, but there are much much worse injuries possible than a broken toe or nose. This is a classic example of placing too much importance on aftereffects. Whether your partner cares for your injuries after the fight is ended or not is irrelevant during the fight (or should be). Your applying the possible outcomes as determining factors to the actual SD situation. If you approach a pure SD situation with a set outcome in your head (as Ive already said) you are most likely already dead. 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I'd *so* like to believe this. For me, what happens on the mats and what happens when someone lunges at you with the half smashed neck of a beer bottle are a million miles apart and not so lazily reconcilable.


 Then I suggest your training is unrealistic. Im not trying to offend, but if you react or act differently on the mats than you would in a pure SD situation you are not realistically training. See, for me, what happens in our combat in school is EXACTLY what I will do (and have done) on the street. 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> The problem is that all through our MA training as we progress through the ranks, building our ring or mat experience and developing our skill and speed, we're deluding our subconscious into believing we are ready for the street as though this "safe" test-tube skillset will automatically translate into workable live fighting competency. For me, I don't believe this is the case. I had my skillset disproven to me somewhere around the middle of my martial career to date, and it forced a rethink of what I _thought_ I knew and of how good a fighter I _thought_ I was.
> 
> I think there really is an odor of complacency and conceit that hangs heavy over SD practices in the martial community. Some pay nothing more than lip service to SD techniques. Some are happily ignorant dealing in irrelevancies but ultimately it's the prevailing attitude of vanity and self-satisfaction with our SD systems that are convincing us that the training we have somehow elevates us above the level of street hoodlums.


 Once again I completely agree. Your mistake is applying that same belief to ALL martial artists or those training for SD. If you have something proven to you, you need to learn from it and grow as it seems you have, but your applying your broken beliefs to all martial artists. In a sense your putting thoughts into their heads and then condemning them for it.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> It's not that the army isn't prepared, a more accurate hypothesis might be that those troops who have _not_ seen action in the live theatre before are perhaps not as prepared as those veterans who have. One of the saddest testaments to this is the oft-cited Vietnam war which failed so many young and courageous troops who may have previously had faith in their preparedness.


 This is a change of opinion for you then? Because you have said those training in SD are not preparednot that they are less prepared. Lets not get into Vietnam on this thread, thats a whole other discussion.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I'm not saying your training or my training will not apply to the street, I'm saying that we cannot AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME what works on the mats will work when someone doesn't flash a blade about in your face but rather runs up behind you and plunges it straight into your kidneys.


 I agree, however I do not agree that the test is to put yourself in that situation. I believe testing can be done in the school (as I have proven). What your talking about is self-destructive. Your proposing putting yourself in the real situation to Test but how many times have you allowed your training partner to jam a blade into your kidneys? This is a self destructive mentality that give exactly the same false confidence you spoke of earlier. We train to better protect ourselves, if you are cut, broken, and worn down you cant protect anything. 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Exactly. SD is a set of techniques and theories that we train and practise in the vacuum of our dojos, dojangs, clubs, schools and practise halls. Street fighting on the other hand, is the mortally dangerous situation one is involuntarily *forced* into to keep oneself alive and unharmed.


 This is the bottom line. You are placing a physical edge on the mortally dangerous situation. If you would act differently from your training during a mortally dangerous situation then I agree.you need to search elsewhere.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> OK, to me, some of you get the idea, some don't wish to question the martial doctrines in which you have been raised, and others simply don't care. Fair enough, all opinions are equally welcome and valid in my house. But rather than having us stuck in the defensive loop, let me provide another alternative... I mean Evangelism I've called it but I'm seeking no converts, I'm just trying to challenge y'all to think seriously about how well you're prepared for the worst.


 Thats a good thing, but then you turn around and use language like some don't wish to question the martial doctrines in which you have been raised. Thats self contradictory. You apply this blanket of carelessness and lazyness to the same people you are saying Im just trying to get you to think.

   7sm


----------



## shesulsa (Apr 2, 2006)

I have been physically attacked four times in my life and been on the wrong side of a gun once.

I've been in several automobile accidents but none severe, and I have had someone try to put me down since I've been training in martial arts.

I'll tell you what happens.  Your adrenaline starts to pump through your veins like speed.  Then everything goes into slow motion.  Some people lose awareness of what they're doing at about that point.  Your training kicks in.

The last time I had to use anything on anybody was a simple joint lock and a pressure point.  This took someone who was going to throw me on the ground out from in front of me and put them on the ground next to me, their dominant arm locked up and inaccessible.  Was I in fear for my life at the time? Yes.

That is a simple move - not even a formal technique in our system.  Will my self-defense work should I be attacked again?  I guess that depends on the situation, now doesn't it?  

I don't care whether a person trains on the mat or in the street or in their garage, there will always be someone out there who will clean the sidewalk/mat/floor with them.  I don't care how many fights they've won  how many trophies they hold, one day they will lose or cut bait before they lose.

You train your way, I'll train mine.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Apr 2, 2006)

isn't the best self-defense avoiding the conflict in the first place?

one of the first signs of evolution i look for in my students is no longer having the desire to fight or prove themselves 'in the street'.


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 2, 2006)

*lonecoyote*,

Firstly, thanks for the post, and for your ideas and no, I ain't actually peddling any system or viewpoint by starting this thread, I'm merely using Bar Brawl Evangelism as an image or scenario to focus readers' attention [the success of which remains in some doubt, hehe!] 

To that end, I have no panacea to what I'd see as a bloated confidence and lacking credibility in the martial arts SD scene in general. As has been pointed out, I patently don't know what everyone trains so would naturally be in no position to comment specifically. There may be some who train for the extreme though I'd still maintain from my experience and my martial travels that there exist a majority of SD teachings which although taught with great verve, skill and experience by women and men with unquestionable motives and integrity, are nevertheless taught in the absence of an appreciation of the true application, thereby negating large chunks within those teachings.

So in answer to your question, what are my great ideas? Well, I have none. As has been alluded to in a previous post, one man's meat is evidently another's poison. It would be impertinent of me [and unwise judging by the general posting tone!] to suggest any specific technique for any specific line of training. For the purposes of this thread I'm just the facilitator however, it's coincidental that you should mention ...


			
				lonecoyote said:
			
		

> Friday nights about 9:30 after the adult TKD class was getting ready to go home, the storm clouds would gather, some guys in Gis, someguys just wearing shorts, Tshirts, and carrying mouthpieces, turned into a completely different place.


As we also had a similar "after hours" with the specific intent of winnowing techniques into more SD-relevant forms [Aikido]. "Gatecrashing" brought the idea to an abrupt halt. But for me, it was ironically the gatecrashers who raised the stakes, heightened the realism and thereby increased the potential for participants to make gains. 

In the end, there's no pressing need to confront the real world. It's safer in the dojo.

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 2, 2006)

*7starmantis*,

A great blow by blow post, thanks for this.

I doubt I'd have the werewithal to reply with any level of eloquence. But might I ask instead how confident you'd be of your own SD capabilities [as a % maybe?] I'm talking on average, just getting on with your normal day to day business.

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 2, 2006)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> You train your way, I'll train mine.


Resoluteness can be an admirable quality no doubt...

*Shesulsa*, far be it from me to give any input into your [or anyone else's] specific training methods. In respect of those, I'd class myself as an expert in nothing. In this thread I am simply posting a challenge for everyone to evaluate their own SD training in relation to potential real world hazards.

Unfortunately, the tendency to take offense and the nature of issuing a challenge to folk's martial arts SD beliefs seem to go together like Bonnie and Clyde. To that end, apologies if I have offended you [or anyone else], as sincerely, none is intended. And if I have offended you by suggesting that you'd be offended by something as trivial as this post, I further apologize.

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 2, 2006)

bushidomartialarts said:
			
		

> isn't the best self-defense avoiding the conflict in the first place?


That's a given without a doubt. My point is that some situations are simply unavoidable no matter how highly ranked in verbal de-escalation a martial artist may be. In those cases, is the mindset with which we have trained behind closed doors of our clubs and schools, useable in a live attack? Question.

My answer would have to be no simply because until someone tries to really hurt you or kill you in the dojo you can never truly know how you will react. And er... no, again, I'm not advocating that or anything like that but rather just presenting an idea. 

I'd say training techniques in the safety and sterility of the dojo are not *automatically* workable in the the brutality of the street. And my challenge is to your confidence in your abilities in _that_ light. I'm not attacking, I'm simply issuing everyone with that challenge purely for themselves.

Respects!


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 2, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> First, your getting caught up in semantics of the words being used. While I agree that words can create and set a mood, thats why we use words like combat, life or death, etc. Your again assuming a certain type of training and applying it to all training. In my training we dont use words like "sparring" or "playing hands" its "combat". You should create the same scenarios in your training that you could encounter outsdie it. The actual intent of my attacker isn't going to change the way I combat him (if it does your training is lacking). I've seen many, many street fights and such as a paramedic in Houston Texas, but I have to propose that if your "street fight" ranges on beyond say a minute or two, you should really look at your training again. I'm not talking about "street fights" where the two are trying to beat down each other or establish dominance, but where I'm going for eyes, knees, etc. Anything else is a mistake on this magical "street" your discussing. If the scenarios and such aren't there in training, maybe you should ask "why".
> 
> 
> I applaud your mindset, that said, call it what you will, but, it's not combat. Some of my Marine friends will attest to that, no matter your training. I've already said that we should train as close as possible to the real thing. So we do agree on that. However, Semantics has nothing to do with it, and I didn't confuse it. There are levels one has to be willing to rise to in real encounters. The attackers intent should decide how you defend yourself. You don't destroy a drunk, that can hardly stand, and takes one, big round punch at you. But, you will destroy someone who caught you in a dark alley and is trying to do you in. A change in mindset? YES! In a dojo, your always in the same mindset--Your aware your training. A hit that lands will do damage, but, isn't there a "sorry" after, a touch of gloves? You won't get that out there! You'll just get more shots.
> ...


----------



## 7starmantis (Apr 3, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> 7starmantis,
> 
> A great blow by blow post, thanks for this.
> 
> ...



First, let me say I understand what your trying to do here and I respect it. I also respect your resolve to stay "friendly" and not offend. Now, I would not know how to relate my confidence in my SD capabilities to a percentage. I would most certainly not attribute a high percentage as I am a realist and understand the nature of SD fighting. I think overconfidence can kill you. I also wouldn't put it too low as I've protected myself in real SD situations with more than one attacker. Maybe its not what your looking for but I would put into a percentage my confidence in the ability of my training to deal with SD situations. I'm extremely confident that the training I do and what goes on in my training is relatable to "the street". I am so because I've seen it with myself and other students. So all things considered I'm more than confident enough to perform my normal daily routines if that means anything. My main issue with your posts are that you seem to believe that it is impossible to train in a way to make you ready for "the street". I still dont understand why you believe this way. Maybe if you could lay out what you feel is lacking in training on a physical technique level.



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> I applaud your mindset, that said, call it what you will, but, it's not combat. Some of my Marine friends will attest to that, no matter your training. I've already said that we should train as close as possible to the real thing. So we do agree on that. However, Semantics has nothing to do with it, and I didn't confuse it. There are levels one has to be willing to rise to in real encounters. The attackers intent should decide how you defend yourself. You don't destroy a drunk, that can hardly stand, and takes one, big round punch at you. But, you will destroy someone who caught you in a dark alley and is trying to do you in. A change in mindset? YES! In a dojo, your always in the same mindset--Your aware your training. A hit that lands will do damage, but, isn't there a "sorry" after, a touch of gloves? You won't get that out there! You'll just get more shots.


With all due respect, I think it might be wise for you to reserve your judgment of others training until you have experienced it. While what I refer to as "combat" in my training may not be firing live bullets at each other, it most certainly is combat. In the sense of:

   1. To oppose in battle; fight against.
   2. To oppose vigorously; struggle against

v. intr.

    To engage in fighting; contend or struggle.

I suport the use of the word combat because it gives the participant an idea of what is to come. You speak of "dojo awareness" and "sporting touches" but that is not present in combat and not in my training for such. Also, no there is no "sorry" after a touch of gloves. I have really been trying to make the point that most people are assuming everyones training matches their own, that is not the case. In our training there is only "more shots" as you say until the encounter is over by one of the agreed upon ways. As far as intent this has allways been a big issue of mine. I dont mean intent in the way you took it where its a drunk friend because I dont see that as intent I see that as condition. The intent is still the same, the drunk is still attacking me. Now, having said that I do not consider myself capable of knowing the intent of every person, therefore if I am attacked, I'm most certainly NOT going to pull anything because I assume their intentions (good or bad). As a 28 year old man, if I'm fighting, if its come to that, I'm fighting for my life or the life of my family....no intention is going to change my actions there. While there is a scale or reasonable force, to assume an attakers intent is a huge mistake and one that may just end your conflict way too soon or in a way you wouldn't choose. Would I try and kill the drunk who swings at me? No of course not, but I'm also not going to fight him either. Take into consideration that many people have been seriously injured by drunk people hardly able to stand, if you allow a preconcieved notion to police your actions you may just end up on the wrong side of that situation.



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> I respect what you've seen, it plays a part. But, with respect, seeing and doing are two different things. Your kids see you drive, can they? Your also right about the times you've proposed. If you fight for more than 10 seconds your probably going to lose. It might not seem long, but it is, if your in it. Your targets are correct as well, but, I promise you not as easy to get to as you claim. Adrenaline, drugs, pain tolerance are different for people. add that to something not present in dojo training-- STRESS--that you feel, where your motor skills are the first to go, that adds to the difficulty. Also, don't assume that they'll drop because you landed strikes to those areas. I 've seen ears ripped off, stabbings, etc.. and the fights continued! The streets aren't magical, never claimed they were, dojo scenarios, no matter how intense, aren't either. The streets are however reality. People in dojos aren't usually the types that commit these attrocities. They wouldnt join a dojo and put in the work-- Another proof of differing mindsets. You wouldn't want to be locked somewhere with the kinds of people being referred to.



I completely agree, seeing and doing are two different things, thats why you should "do" in your training. Also keep in mind I'm coming from a place of "doing" allready in my life. I have claimed no ease in any confrontation whether it be striking certain targets or not. Thats the probem with these kinds of discussions, assumptions run rampant. I only mentioned certain targets, I didn't speak at all of their ease "to get". I used those terms to describe the mindset of the fight; ie one that is serious, one that is life threatening. Again, it might be best if we all just clear our minds of what we think of "dojo training" for this discussion. If stress is not a part of your training then I wholeheartedly believe you are not training realistically. See, you have a certain type of training in your head and are applying that preconceived notion against all training. Stress is a huge part of realistic training. Also, I didn't say anything about someone dropping from a strike to any area. In fact, one of the main principles of my "style" is not relying on anything to drop a person. We continue fighting until the person is not a threat anymore. We explain to beginners that you dont stop fighting when you knock a person down, you fight them on the way down and into the pavement until they cannot threaten you any longer. I agree with what your saying about "dojo people" versus "street people", but that is only a generalization. In fact, I train to (when neccesary) be much more violent and vicious than most martial artist could stomach. See, a big part of our training is mental. Its a whole different level of training to learn to "flip the switch" in your mind to fight in certain ways. Many "martial artists" would consider that type of fighting to be nasty, violent, cheap, what have you. I say thats exactly what I want to do in that type of fight. In fact, I train in such a way that those people wouldn't want to be locked in a room with me not the other way around. 

Let me be clear about a few things. First, I'm not trying to promote my way of training and I'm certainly not insinuating that my way is the only way. I also dont want to give the idea that I think my type of training is in the minority, look around a bit, there are alot of people starting to train realistically and alive. I agree that there is an element missing in training. You aren't goin to actually break your partners arm (or what have you) but why do you think the ability to stop before causing serious injury somehow detracts from your ability to apply the needed extra pressure to break the arm? Its hard to get to that point, but its not impossible to train with the intensity and stress of a real situation. Many dont do it because its extremely taxing on the body and mind, but its real. Why is training "theory" or "untested" when I test it everyday with my partners? What is it about a real situation that makes you think your training is lacking? I throw full power kicks, punches, throws, takedowns, locks, etc everyday. I'm in the bag room hours and hours a week. I dont see why I should assume my training is not enough to protect me. I dont propose assuming it will protect you, but I believe it is possibel to test your skill for real situations, it just takes some effort and creativity.

7sm


----------



## CuongNhuka (Apr 3, 2006)

My therapist jokeingly suggested something like this. Myself and anouther gentleman (that's what the kid called himself) got into a little scuffle, and he wants to beat me up. Jon (my therapist) suggested that the school (were this happened) should put a boxing ring and rent out space to kidds who want to fight. If you think about it, it kinda makes sense. The desire to fight is almost basic human insetect. And if it's done with rules, referees (the gym teachers) and a few percautions, it would allow people to beat the crapp out of each other, and there would a drasticly reduced chance of someone dieing. And it could be done without anyone riscing getting into trouble. It almost makes sense. But it will never happen. Congress, Senate, and other law makers have it set so that nothing like that will ever happen. 
I read a story though, of a bar in North Carolian that allowed people that had issues to deal with it in the back room with an old Irish martial sport called "purring". It is the same idea as Boxing, but you can only kick, and it's only to the knee or below. But this was back in the 1800's.

Sweet Brighit Bless your Blade,

John


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 3, 2006)

7starmantis,

Thanks once again. When I sat down and typed this thread, I was setting an introspective challenge to each martial artist who trains SD techniques and philosophies without much in the way of consideration for the real, mortally dangerous application of those techniques and that philosophy. Now, let me lay something out which may sound glib but is in no ways intended to... I issue that challenge to everyone *except* you and those who train as you do. That's not being facetious, it's being sincere because the description of your training methods paints a picture of pushing the boundaries from the theoretical out into the real. This is something I have to say, I genuinely hadn't encountered officially as part of any TMA though I've been party to after hours "lock ins", disorganized "park meets" etc. etc. So, all I can say is, my hat's off to you and I think there are many who could benefit from taking direction from or at least paying attention to your SD training methods, in particular the following two points:



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> one of the main principles of my "style" is not relying on anything to drop a person. We continue fighting until the person is not a threat anymore. We explain to beginners that you dont stop fighting when you knock a person down, you fight them on the way down and into the pavement until they cannot threaten you any longer.


and...



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> In fact, I train to (when neccesary) be much more violent and vicious than most martial artist could stomach.


These are skill and mindsets which personally, I've had to leave the safety of my dojo to acquire and which honestly, I have not seen condoned, let alone being included as part of any core syllabus trained in a TMA club or school. They are the sort of additions to one's defensive portfolio which I'm trying to address through this thread feeling that there's a dearth [fear even] of such boldness within the dojos - or at least the one's I have experienced. Perhaps those places of training I have visited have been staunchly conservative. I am happy though to know there are radical methodologies such as yours being utilized out there.

In any case, I applaud you for your breadth of training and for striving to engineer your practise SD situations so they mirror the real world as accurately as possible. 

I can only say one more thing - that if I believed your approach was the norm I'd not have initiated the thread, however I remain firm in the opinion that your training style still remains in the minority while the general martial arts populus remains happily ignorant - as is somewhat apparent reading through any one of several threads here on MT, some archive and some current.

You should write a book...

Respects!


----------



## stickarts (Apr 3, 2006)

Training to be able to defend oneself and yet doing everything possible to avoid a fight and be peaceful is the great paradox in martial arts!
For the sake of argument, let's say this:
For many, martial arts is like having an insurance policy: you hope you won't get into a real assault but want to be better prepared in case you are.
Do you go out of your way to test your insurance?
Will you deliberately crash your car to find out if your car insurance policy will work like you hoped? Is it a victory if you get a cracked skull from the accident but your insurance company comes through for you and pays the hospital bill? :0)
Not saying you shouldn't do some pressure testing. Just saying how far do you test it before the cons outweight the pro's.
Just another viewpoint to join the fray.....:0)


----------



## MartialIntent (Apr 3, 2006)

stickarts said:
			
		

> Do you go out of your way to test your insurance?
> Will you deliberately crash your car to find out if your car insurance policy will work like you hoped? Is it a victory if you get a cracked skull from the accident but your insurance company comes through for you and pays the hospital bill? :0)


Interesting analogy to insurance! The sole task of insurance is to compensate you as appropriate in the case of damage or injury. My response would have to be then, would you _really_ buy an insurance policy that you *weren't entirely sure* would pay out if the worst happened? You're in Good Hands?? Hmmm... Maybe not, if year in and year out, you've been buying into the no-payout-policy. 

OK, so I *am* being facetious now - but just to make the point... 




			
				stickarts said:
			
		

> Just saying how far do you test it before the cons outweight the pro's.


Joking aside, I get what you're saying - if I train to the limits with my practise-fighting and maim my training partner, am I happy to look him or her in the eye with my new found proof of effectiveness? Hardly. I still say though that it's not that folk don't test their SD training far enough, it's my experience that many *simply don't test it at all*. The assumption is that it will work and that's reinforced by an often naive trustworthiness and an attitude lacking in our normal skepticism when we're presented with techniques which are as I say, often subjected to nowhere near the tolerances that they should be if they're designed specifically for SD. And that's the scenario that would concern me.

But yes, you've hit the nail on the head right there. That's the dilemma. How do we reconcile a street attack situation where we may realistically be killed or maimed with training in which we neither want to be killed or kill someone with whom we are training? There are some interesting ideas up-thread.

Thanks for your input 
Respects!


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 3, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> With all due respect, I think it might be wise for you to reserve your judgment of others training until you have experienced it. While what I refer to as "combat" in my training may not be firing live bullets at each other, it most certainly is combat. In the sense of:
> 
> 1. To oppose in battle; fight against.
> 2. To oppose vigorously; struggle against
> ...


 
O.K. if you want to throw out definitions, I won't argue. (Fighting isn't that intellectual). However, in laymans terms, when one speaks of being in combat, it is pretty much understood what was inferred.

With all due respect to you, I think you should reserve judgement for FIGHTING, until you've experienced it. (not just by what you've seen, or how you've trained)

As for the drunk thing. I never said it was a friend, they were not dangerous, or it wasn't an attack. You should defend yourself if attacked. Any attacker is dangerous and should be viewed as such. My point was against your argument of mindsets. If you treat all the same, FINE! Each to their own, When I was early in my Martial Mindset, I thought the same way, and DID so. However, just as advice, If you evaluate a drunk, that can't hardly stand, and destroy them the same as any attacker, when all you had to do was block/evade, push them down, and "run", You'll Have some problems!

I also didn't say that training doesn't prepare you. In fact, I've repeated it, and will do so again. *You should train as hard as possible, if self* *defense is your goal!* *TRAINING WILL PREPARE YOU*--*To A certain extent! *However, You don't beleive it, but, I'll say it anyway, as one from a lot of experience. Mindset, and physiological differences are present in a Real fight, that are  not in *training! *(no matter how extreme one takes it). The only way to do it, is, *to do it!* (unfortunately). No creativity or effort will replace it! I'm also not saying or advocating going out and picking fights either.

On a closing note, If you do train the way you do-- GOD Bless YOU! These posts don't apply to you. Just don't be the kind that speaks of truthful knowledge, when you simulate everything. One can play "combat" as much as they want, but real "combat" is a whole different animal.

With Respect to all!


----------



## stickarts (Apr 4, 2006)

MartialIntent,

No argument regarding testing your training!  If the student's goal is to effectively defend themself, then there needs to be some kind of live training. Developing a false sense of confidence can be worse than not training but being wary! Thanks for your response and viewpoint! Your views are very well stated and I enjoy reading your posts.


----------



## 7starmantis (Apr 4, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> O.K. if you want to throw out definitions, I won't argue. (Fighting isn't that intellectual). However, in laymans terms, when one speaks of being in combat, it is pretty much understood what was inferred.


 Actually I beg to differ. I approach fighting from a very intelectual standpoint. I'm not sure what your getting at that was inferred, but I think I meant to infer it 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> With all due respect to you, I think you should reserve judgement for FIGHTING, until you've experienced it. (not just by what you've seen, or how you've trained)


 Ok, I hope you aren't getting upset, I appologize if I have offended. However, please re-read my posts. I *have* experienced it many times, therefore I *did* reserve judgement until I experienced it. Also, having said that, I dont think I agree with your (infered) definition of "FIGHTING". In my opinion the few minutes I have spent really protecting myself (where I was in fear for my life) amounts to very little compared to the years and years of fighting I have done in training and competition. I have the philosophy of over overtraining. If I'm training for a 10 second SD fight I'll prepare my body for a 45 minute full out fight. Having experienced both "training fighting" and "FIGHTING" (by your definition) I still say I successfully prepare myself for real SD situations. I dont like overconfidence and to say your 100% prepared is to cheapend your reason for training, but I do feel prepared for whatever may come. I tell you what, learning to respond under the pressure of taking a beating is a nice tool when it comes to SD, in that light I try to fight with as many people I can that are better than myself.



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> As for the drunk thing. I never said it was a friend, they were not dangerous, or it wasn't an attack. You should defend yourself if attacked. Any attacker is dangerous and should be viewed as such. My point was against your argument of mindsets. If you treat all the same, FINE! Each to their own, When I was early in my Martial Mindset, I thought the same way, and DID so. However, just as advice, If you evaluate a drunk, that can't hardly stand, and destroy them the same as any attacker, when all you had to do was block/evade, push them down, and "run", You'll Have some problems!


 Again, I appologize if I have offended. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, I was simply trying to show my reasoning for my mindset. I think you misunderstood my point. I did *not* say anything close to "destroy" the drunk, in fact if you read my post I said I wouldn't even fight him. I thought that it was obvious that I meant I wouldn't engage him at all. A simple "block/evade, push them down, and run" may do the job. What I was tyring to point out is that it might just be anything but simple. If you let down your guard or approach the situation any different than a real SD situation your making a mental mistake that may cost you your life. I spoke of a scale of reasonable force and everything, what I mean is that morally and legally I do not have to try and determine the intent of any attacker. I will address the drunk the same as a surprise jump out of a dark alley, the difference is the drunk will be done way before the other would (hopefully). I wil still follow up, I will still perform my defense 100%, the drunk will simply be handled quicker with less damage than the other (again hopefully). In my opinion anything less than 100% would leave me open for bad times. What about the drunk's 3 friends sitting behind me or the one sitting next to my wife? That was my point, sorry if I offended.



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> I also didn't say that training doesn't prepare you. In fact, I've repeated it, and will do so again. *You should train as hard as possible, if self* *defense is your goal!* *TRAINING WILL PREPARE YOU*--*To A certain extent! *However, You don't beleive it, but, I'll say it anyway, as one from a lot of experience. Mindset, and physiological differences are present in a Real fight, that are not in *training! *(no matter how extreme one takes it). The only way to do it, is, *to do it!* (unfortunately). No creativity or effort will replace it! I'm also not saying or advocating going out and picking fights either.


 I agree with you but I think your statement isn't complete. There *is* something missing in training, but I dont agree that the "something" is untrainable. Your right, mindset is different, but you would be surprised how close one can come to that mindset in creative training. However, I dont think the change in mindset is something that will cause a breach in my defenses, skills, common sense, or anything else.What is so special about that "mindset" that you think makes it change so very much in SD? 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> On a closing note, If you do train the way you do-- GOD Bless YOU! These posts don't apply to you. Just don't be the kind that speaks of truthful knowledge, when you simulate everything. One can play "combat" as much as they want, but real "combat" is a whole different animal.


 Thank you, and I dont mean to stir up the discussion. However, I think you would find most "gangstas" (as titled earlier) would care for (or last long) in our "combat". Its pretty vicious and violent and the intent is to end it as quickly as possible. What makes your skills better is as everyone gets better you can fight longer and harder. I think this increase is one of unlimited potential. I also think the hours we spend doing it is much more than what will be needed for a SD situation. In a sense we try to flip the situation back on the attacker. I train so hard and vicious that when attacked I can effectively turn on the attacker and literally become the attacker. There is alot of mental training for that type of skill too. I'm not saying I have reached that level either, I just mean that is the intent of my training and I think most "gangsta" would find quite a handfull in any of my trainig partners. Anything can happen and anyone can die quickly in a real SD situation but I train to stack the odds in my favor...what else can you do? Oh, I also have a concealed handgun liscense....that takes care of alot of it right there.

Just my own opinions and experiences, your welcome to disagree....in fact, if you didn't I might think you were a bit crazy 

7sm


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 4, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Actually I beg to differ. I approach fighting from a very intelectual standpoint. I'm not sure what your getting at that was inferred, but I think I meant to infer it
> 
> Ok, I hope you aren't getting upset, I appologize if I have offended. However, please re-read my posts. I *have* experienced it many times, therefore I *did* reserve judgement until I experienced it. Also, having said that, I dont think I agree with your (infered) definition of "FIGHTING". In my opinion the few minutes I have spent really protecting myself (where I was in fear for my life) amounts to very little compared to the years and years of fighting I have done in training and competition. I have the philosophy of over overtraining. If I'm training for a 10 second SD fight I'll prepare my body for a 45 minute full out fight. Having experienced both "training fighting" and "FIGHTING" (by your definition) I still say I successfully prepare myself for real SD situations. I dont like overconfidence and to say your 100% prepared is to cheapend your reason for training, but I do feel prepared for whatever may come. I tell you what, learning to respond under the pressure of taking a beating is a nice tool when it comes to SD, in that light I try to fight with as many people I can that are better than myself.
> 
> ...


 
No, I'm not upset, there's no bad intentions/ or feelings from me. My responses come from many years growing up and working hearing "the talk" but, not seeing "the walk", If you get what I'm saying. I've seen more "hard core experts" go down, and get that EMT treatment, that you used to do. Again, I applaud your training! keep it up! Try to encourage it to others! Ultimately I think, judging by how you say you view, and do training, that we are very similar! (at least in that "mind set")

P.S. I know we think differently about real self defense theories, But, speaking as someone with more than a "few minutes" of experience, Don't sell those minutes of yours short! They are more valuable to you than your training if it comes down to it for real! (Plus, Being crazy is a definite plus in my world also, I appreciate the compliment!  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 )

Be Safe!


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 13, 2006)

Something happened a few days ago that made me think of this thread. A co worker, who has been a long time dojo star, and I would admit, is a pretty good martial artist, that busts his backside training, worked with us, and "got into it". We had been messing with him earlier on about what would happen. He just blew it off, and was "confident", so to speak. Anyway, he got into it, and got trashed, by a smaller individual, needing to get bailed out. Since then he has thought deeply and re-evaluated his training, doing things "differently". Now, he is very anxious to come back to work, and experiment. One of our other workers joked by tapping him on the head, and saying "Congratulations, you've been baptised!" Which made me think of this thread!


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 13, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> when it kicks of for real, you're in an extreme situation like it or not. I don't feel one could ever train those situations in the sterile environment of a practise hall. If we want to proclaim our arts as vehicles for defense then surely we need to get our arts out on the streets. It's about walking the walk.


 
Here's where my issue with your concept arises.  I never trained "on the street" growing up.  I trained in a gym in a guys house.  But the first time I needed it on the street I walked away the winner.  Why can't I teach my students the same way I was taught?  Why will it be less effective for them than it was for me?  Getting yourself cut open in a no holds barred fight doesn't even sound like good self defense to me.   So would you start out your novices this way, or only "experienced" students?

My self defense students walk the walk by avoiding conflict if at all possible, and we have no delusions about real combat


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 13, 2006)

The problem is a missapropriation of danger, or skill for the "streets". There are no special powers on the street that allow for things to happen that cannot happen in your training. Sure you can't train reacting and fighting after having been stabbed in the chest, but certainly we aren't to go around stabbing each other in our training. You can train those needed skills in other ways such as familiarizing yourself with pain, training the mental state needed for these situations etc. I have fought harder, longer, and more agressively in my training than I have ever had to do on the "str33tz". You will always have those who say "but its not the same" and thats true, but only in part. In your training you can cover the areas needed to deal with true self defense. Remember we are talking self *defense*. Going out and getting stabbed all the time or getting your knees broken is not self *defense*....thats a whole other thread 

7sm


----------



## painstain (Jul 13, 2006)

i like your way of thinking, but try this, be by yourself on your own mission to prove your ability, but cut the bad guys off, help someone out while doing it. present yourself as a target for one or two or more to come rob you. or jump in when you see 10 gang bangers beatin the hell out of some defenseless victim. thats the true way to test your art if your really about proving the effectiveness or proving your individual skill. i do this from time to time and your not going to find a lot of support on this forum  for going out of your way to protect or prevent. or if your just tired of societies bullies getting away with a grin (thats me right there). some people just don't get what your saying. i think i do, but prefer privacy and a more realistic catch.


----------



## green meanie (Jul 13, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> If you got this far, thanks for reading. I'm very interested in your thoughts in particular as to why this would not apply to your art. Respects!


 
I can't think of any. It sounds like fun.


----------



## Adept (Jul 13, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> These are skill and mindsets which personally, I've had to leave the safety of my dojo to acquire and which honestly, I have not seen condoned, let alone being included as part of any core syllabus trained in a TMA club or school.



I've had very similar experiences. I think part of the problem, especially here on Martialtalk, is that many of the people here who defend TMA, and who train in TMA, take those extra steps to bridge the gaps between the basic syllabus and what they, as students, need. Therefore their own personal training in TMA gives them a well rounded and realistic skill set.

I posit that most martial artists are unlike those of us on here who take our MA that seriously, and are living in ignorance.



> I remain firm in the opinion that your training style still remains in the minority while the general martial arts populus remains happily ignorant - as is somewhat apparent reading through any one of several threads here on MT, some archive and some current.



Agreed.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 13, 2006)

Adept said:
			
		

> I've had very similar experiences. I think part of the problem, especially here on Martialtalk, is that many of the people here who defend TMA, and who train in TMA, take those extra steps to bridge the gaps between the basic syllabus and what they, as students, need. Therefore their own personal training in TMA gives them a well rounded and realistic skill set.
> 
> I posit that most martial artists are unlike those of us on here who take our MA that seriously, and are living in ignorance.


 

I would agree with this. Good post.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 14, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> You will always have those who say "but its not the same" and thats true, but only in part. In your training you can cover the areas needed to deal with true self defense.
> 7sm


 

That's true, but, only in part.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 14, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> That's true, but, only in part.



Yes but no one has offered a way to train fighting under the stress of a knife in the chest, without having a knife in the chest. You have to understand the limitations of your training and do what is neccessary to cover these "other skill sets" as best as possible while keeping yourself and your training partners safe. Unsafe training is pointless as you can't defend yourself while laying in a a hospital bed. However, can you really say a person who has experienced this proverbial knife in the chest is better skilled at self defense or fighting under that stress? Are gunshot survivors better adept to deal with getting whot than people who have never been shot? Will they react better or have a higher rate of survival the next tim ethey are shot as opposed t oa new victim? Not neccessarily. Putting yourself through something does not equal training to deal with that situation. If that were the case why do people who survive tragic accidents often die in tragic accidents?

7sm


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 16, 2006)

No one spoke of any of the above scenarios throughout the thread, or argued them. It was simply an argument of does training equal reality. You said you can accomplish it completely. I said that you can't. 

With all due respect, You admitted to only a few minutes of real fighting, in your life. Based on that, your light view of "reality", and your pump up of training , as the answer, you are not qualified to address the question of the thread. Listen, and learn from  the people who do it for a living and have more than a "few minutes" of fighting. If you disagree fine.

I agree with training, it's all we have for the most part. However, one must realize it's  ALL SIMULATION  of a real situation. Simulations, no matter how close they come, are what they are--Simulation.

I'm not trying to attack you, but as an old schooler, that was/is one of those people. You are preaching a dangerous mindset, one, that I've seen grow in the M.A. world. Lose the ego of training. Take it for what it is, and hope to God that you never have to try it out. 

Everyone be safe.


----------



## Dark (Jul 17, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> IIf you got this far, thanks for reading. I'm very interested in your thoughts in particular as to why this would not apply to your art.
> 
> Respects!


 
1) I've been in those situations and in my younger days made a point to look up instructors with "street fighting" experience. I found that the ones who claimed to be "expert street fighters" were full of BS and the ones who were street fighters or x-street fighters didn't claim claim anything more then scars and stories behind them, most of which they wouldn't get to detailed on.

2) What would I be afraid of, the pattern of esculated aggression. In high school I had a boy who wanted to fight me. To scare him away my cousin told him I knew karate, which I did but she didn't know. So everyone wanted to fight me to test my "karate." 

As an adult, and especially in the times I spent in the Army, drunken idiots wanted to test my martial arts training, some of them after getting beaten, or choked into submission came back with pool ques, knives and I've seen a few draw guns, though never in the military. At some point someone will forget pride and proving themselves and try to get revenge.

3) Go into any Irish Pub drink a beer and put your glass upside down on the bar. Thats the sign to have a good drunken throw down and do without pretense or childish bullying. Its nothing new, been around for years 

4) Street fighters tend to be drunken-stoned thugs among other druken-stoned thugs, their general intent isn't to show skill or ability or be the "king of fighters" they only want to establish dominance through aggression and violence. When they fail to scare you, and they can't beat you you they will eventually try to kill or hurt someone close to you.

They are not the group you want to test yourself against, they are the group you want to avoid and they are the worst case-senario in a SD situation. Lets just say been there done that and don't want to go back.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 17, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> With all due respect, You admitted to only a few minutes of real fighting, in your life. Based on that, your light view of "reality", and your pump up of training , as the answer, you are not qualified to address the question of the thread. Listen, and learn from the people who do it for a living and have more than a "few minutes" of fighting. If you disagree fine.


Once again you have misunderstood by post and continued on with your assumptions of my training. What I said was the "real fighting" or self defense fighting I had done all ended quite fast, so the combined total is just a few minutes. Grant it that was probably an understatement to make my point, but the life or death fighting I have done has never been a long drawn out 3, 5 minute round fight. Its over very quickly on my part or their part....I've been on both ends. My "light view of reality" comes from my own expireince fighting and my expierience saving the lifes of those who fight as a paramedic...this is of course all covered in this thread. The question in this thread is one of training and now I'm not qualified to address it? To whom did you mean to ask your question? What is your accepted amount of time spent fighting for your life? What do you define as qualified to address you or your questions? There is no one who fights life and death for a living....sorry to bring in my "light view of reality" but thats the facts. Your talking about true self defense fighting and then talking about people who do it for a living? Seems your view of reality is a little blurry. I'm sorry you misunderstood my point to the "few minutes" of fighting comment. I have successfully defending myself in several life or death fightin situations, defended people around me in these situations, and entered these situations (blades and bullets still flying) to save the lifes of people like what your describing...who look for life or death fights to prove themselvs or make themselves seem "legit". 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> I agree with training, it's all we have for the most part. However, one must realize it's ALL SIMULATION of a real situation. Simulations, no matter how close they come, are what they are--Simulation.


I agree with this, have agreed with this and have posted as such this entire thread. What I do not agree with is that training is simply not enough to prepare you for real situations. It all depends on your trianing....thus far my training has gotten me through every "real fighting" situation I have been in.....why is that? Your incorrectly asigning some lesser value to the word "simulation". Your saying a simulation is lesser, or wekare, or provides less experience than a real situation, but real training, based on realistic expectations has been enough for everyone I have ever met and has been around for many many years. I think what I refer to as training and what you refer to as training may just be two different things. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> I'm not trying to attack you, but as an old schooler, that was/is one of those people. You are preaching a dangerous mindset, one, that I've seen grow in the M.A. world. Lose the ego of training. Take it for what it is, and hope to God that you never have to try it out.


I'm preaching a mindset of "doing rather than talking". I personally tell everyone that trains with me, ego is the number one killer of good training. My training and training parterns are ego free, I wont train with someone I feel has even the slightest hint of an ego. My experiences with my training and its usefullness are what I'm basing my points on here, not the "ego of training". I do hope I had never had to "try it out" but I have numerous times and it has allways been enough to get me home in one piece. Thats why I'm saying training is enough and can be proper and prepare you for real situations.....because it has. 

7sm


----------



## Odin (Jul 17, 2006)

I think we should all learn Muay thai!!that way you get to test what you've learnt in the ring and you can see for yourself that it works!with out having to pick a fight with biker-jacket thug!

Like my Kru told me ''unfortunatly to be a good fighter you have to actually have a couple fights!''

What ever floats thy boat I guess.


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 17, 2006)

Well, someone _really should_ tell those 11 and 12 year old girls who manage to fight off their attempted abductors that they've been doing it _ALL WRONG_.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 17, 2006)

Odin said:
			
		

> Like my Kru told me ''unfortunatly to be a good fighter you have to actually have a couple fights!''



That is 100% accurate, I agree completely. I think the issue of this thread is the definition of what actually is a "fight". According to this thread, your MT fighting wouldn't be real as its part of your training and not on the street for life or death.

7sm


----------



## painstain (Jul 17, 2006)

-blink-


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 17, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> 1) I've been in those situations and in my younger days made a point to look up instructors with "street fighting" experience. I found that the ones who claimed to be "expert street fighters" were full of BS and the ones who were street fighters or x-street fighters didn't claim claim anything more then scars and stories behind them, most of which they wouldn't get to detailed on.


 
Amen - This has been my experience as well - a lot of bluster and not much else



> At some point someone will forget pride and proving themselves and try to get revenge.


 
yup - while you're out proving your skills, they're pulling out that glock



> 3) Go into any Irish Pub drink a beer and put your glass upside down on the bar. Thats the sign to have a good drunken throw down and do without pretense or childish bullying. Its nothing new, been around for years


 
You might want to make sure you've been there a few times before this though - otherwise you might find yourself alone vs. the bar... 



> 4) Street fighters tend to be drunken-stoned thugs among other druken-stoned thugs, their general intent isn't to show skill or ability or be the "king of fighters" they only want to establish dominance through aggression and violence. When they fail to scare you, and they can't beat you they will eventually try to kill or hurt someone close to you
> 
> They are not the group you want to test yourself against, they are the group you want to avoid and they are the worst case-senario in a SD situation. Lets just say been there done that and don't want to go back.


 
And theres' the real crux of the matter - you're playing with more than your own life here.  seriously - I've had a few experiences where friends of mine got into trouble because someone was pissed at me - just for doing my job at the time (bouncing).

Great post, Dark


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 17, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Once again you have misunderstood by post and continued on with your assumptions of my training. What I said was the "real fighting" or self defense fighting I had done all ended quite fast, so the combined total is just a few minutes. Grant it that was probably an understatement to make my point, but the life or death fighting I have done has never been a long drawn out 3, 5 minute round fight. Its over very quickly on my part or their part....I've been on both ends. My "light view of reality" comes from my own expireince fighting and my expierience saving the lifes of those who fight as a paramedic...this is of course all covered in this thread. The question in this thread is one of training and now I'm not qualified to address it? To whom did you mean to ask your question? What is your accepted amount of time spent fighting for your life? What do you define as qualified to address you or your questions? There is no one who fights life and death for a living....sorry to bring in my "light view of reality" but thats the facts. Your talking about true self defense fighting and then talking about people who do it for a living? Seems your view of reality is a little blurry. I'm sorry you misunderstood my point to the "few minutes" of fighting comment. I have successfully defending myself in several life or death fightin situations, defended people around me in these situations, and entered these situations (blades and bullets still flying) to save the lifes of people like what your describing...who look for life or death fights to prove themselvs or make themselves seem "legit".
> 
> 
> I agree with this, have agreed with this and have posted as such this entire thread. What I do not agree with is that training is simply not enough to prepare you for real situations. It all depends on your trianing....thus far my training has gotten me through every "real fighting" situation I have been in.....why is that? Your incorrectly asigning some lesser value to the word "simulation". Your saying a simulation is lesser, or wekare, or provides less experience than a real situation, but real training, based on realistic expectations has been enough for everyone I have ever met and has been around for many many years. I think what I refer to as training and what you refer to as training may just be two different things.
> ...


 
O.K. Once again, you said (and again above) that your real fighting/sd experinces add up to a few minutes, which is exactly what I pointed out, so...there was no misunderstanding on my part. 

As to your training, I didn't deny it, Just pointed out, it's all simulations of real situations. 3-5 minute round/ring fights....No comparrison at all to the real sd fight. (sorry) Also, paramedic training, great, I'm a first responder also, but, treating the wounded of fights, though noble, is irrelevant to this conversation.

As to the topic of the thread : BAR BRAWLING and S.D in general, there are those that do it for a living in the security industry. (They stop the trainers from getting beat to a pulp) Add to that,  coming from bad areas, where blades, bullets, and hand to hand experience is bountiful. Showing up to treat those people, not the same as doing what caused those injuries.

My view of reality blurry???  Your the one arguing "training", substituting that for Reality. Are you seeing straight? Two different definitions here dude. Reality and training aren't equal substitutes. Training is the practice of dealing with reality scenarions. (dry runs if you will)

Bottom line Training and REAL Experience are 2 different animals.


----------



## Dark (Jul 17, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Thats why I'm saying training is enough and can be proper and prepare you for real situations.....because it has.


 
7starmatis, if I may interject for a minute, but are you serious? No amount of training, even the full-contact training as Odin suggested is comparable to the real world. And allot of the fights you will incounter in the real world won't be from experienced street fighters, bikers or hard-core criminal types but the average joe. 

The former I mentioned will shot or stab first and fight later. No training can prepare for that, as my old drill sargent used to say "In combat all this training doesn't mean ****, the three things you will remember are shoot, duck and run..." And sadly he was right, and there are several experts who agree with that fact. Read the links below...

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/fightingfacts.html#Tony_Blauer

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/streetrat.html#streetfighting

http://www.burrese.com/Personal_Security_&_Self_Defense/Articles/Fights_vs_Combat.htm

http://www.burrese.com/Personal_Security_&_Self_Defense/Articles/Articles_by_Others/street_people.htm

http://www.burrese.com/Personal_Security_&_Self_Defense/Articles/Articles_by_Others/criminal_mind_by_peyton_quinn.htm

http://www.themartialist.com/pecom/rogue.htm

I'm not going to say your training is useless, but training no matter what form it takes is never an end all be all...


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 17, 2006)

Thank you Dark!  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Once again put just like I wanted too.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 18, 2006)

Odin said:
			
		

> I think we should all learn Muay thai!!that way you get to test what you've learnt in the ring and you can see for yourself that it works!with out having to pick a fight with biker-jacket thug!
> 
> Like my Kru told me ''unfortunatly to be a good fighter you have to actually have a couple fights!''
> 
> What ever floats thy boat I guess.


 
Hmmmmmm. One on one ( mostly ), close in weight and size, a referee, rules to follow, Gloves on, no weapons, other than natural ones, a fair fight? ... If that's what would replace the real stuff--I'm all for it! Sign me up!


----------



## Jenna (Jul 18, 2006)

MI why I am surprised at you my clever friend though I will assume you are playing games and being devils advocate here cos usually anyone talking up this sort of thing is fantasising over their lack of raw and real experience.. but this is not what i heard bout you so I will let you away with it 

Otherwise.. this is all very interesting and but to say an artist needs validation from a "real" fight is a very relevant point but it is not the only relevance.. I have a friend who is a midwife.. she has delivered almost 200 beautiful babies.. some were easy some were traumatic and unfortunately some little mites did not even make it and but the point is she does not have babies of her own but she is trained to deliver. If it ever comes her time to have her own well she is amazingly trained to know whether everything is on track..

and you will say duh Jenna it is not the same thing at all.. I would say duh.. I KNOW I am just talking a little laterally here.. Anyway I will go leave you boys alone to play.. sounds like um.. mentalk to me  pffft.. ha!

Be good now 
J for Jenna


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 18, 2006)

I don't know about mentalk. From my experience, the women get into it more often, more heavily, and more ferociously.


----------



## Adept (Jul 18, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> 7starmatis, if I may interject for a minute, but are you serious? No amount of training, even the full-contact training as Odin suggested is comparable to the real world.



If I may...

What I believe Mr Mantis is trying to say is that someone who has no actual exerience, but a good deal of competent training can engage succesfully in a physical confrontation.

Now experience is certainly an incredibly valuable learning tool, but it _is_ possible to come out on top 'on the street' without it.


----------



## painstain (Jul 18, 2006)

i'd like to know how many of you actually grew up on the streets, dealing with gangs in the only way you can, overwhelming force and violence. did any of you grow up scrappin or is it just some fantasy. 

in a street fight, if my training isn't working, i'll hit you in the head with a hammer. plain and simple. or pull my own gun out. what? the gangsters can do it. shoot i'll do it to if i have to. i'm sure you all could think of a hundred different ways to protect yourself agianst that but i doubt it. i would rather share the mentality if needed of a gang mamber or "bad guy" to win the conflict.

with respect,
painstain


----------



## Kreth (Jul 18, 2006)

painstain said:
			
		

> i'd like to know how many of you actually grew up on the streets, dealing with gangs in the only way you can, overwhelming force and violence. did any of you grow up scrappin or is it just some fantasy.


Here's a good rule of thumb: If someone is saying, "this is how it is on the street" then it's probably:
 :bs:


----------



## Odin (Jul 18, 2006)

You know this all really seems like a very very pointless argument...I mean think about what your all trying to establish here,your all trying to defend your art in saying that it would work in a street fight when in truth no real answer.no one really knows, theres so many possibilities and probabilities and if's and butts and what if there were five of them or if one had a hammer or if one had only one leg but he was tkd balckbelt....its all stupid,there is no answer you just dont know what will happen in a streetfight and as such there is no way to prevent such from happening there are no special moves or this and that all you would have is your training and reflexes thats it theres no secret special move in your martial art that will know how to defeat 3 drunken thugs outside a night club on a Friday nightthats just not what fighting is. ,English MMA fighter Lee Murray was always in the papers over here a lot for fighting,he used to fight with one guy,two guys, beat down 3 guys once all with knifes all inside night clubs and bars,you could say that his martial art worked.....and then in had another fight outside a clubbed and got stabbed and was in hospital for a bit....so did his martial art fail him?or was it chance?
7 years of MMA training against a thug,that was lucky enough to get a good strike in..again how can you determine if his art maybe or maybe didnt work?
Im shocked to think that people think there is some mystic aura surrounded martial arts that if you practice one you turn into chuck Norris and you can beat everyone down just like the movies..its just not realistic and that goes for all martial arts and all fighters.
I think though that thats one thing that you have to actually fight to in order to understand.


As for seeing what your art and you can do,why not have a fight?get padded up find a mate go at it..and then find some one else and go at it.thats why I like muay thai and MMA I go to loads of fight clubs where I can just go down and try out what Ive learned in my class in a combat situation.


----------



## Odin (Jul 18, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Hmmmmmm. One on one ( mostly ), close in weight and size, a referee, rules to follow, Gloves on, no weapons, other than natural ones, a fair fight? ... If that's what would replace the real stuff--I'm all for it! Sign me up!


 
see...but then there is no answer.....what do you guys want?maybe next time you go to class you should suggest that your teacher all take you out on a field trip to the nearest bad neighbour hood so that you can practice your thug streetfighting!( : 

Ring fighting or MMA gives you an envirmoment to see hoe well you can fight,and helps you find out what works and what doesnt.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jul 18, 2006)

painstain said:
			
		

> i'd like to know how many of you actually grew up on the streets, dealing with gangs in the only way you can, overwhelming force and violence. did any of you grow up scrappin or is it just some fantasy.
> 
> in a street fight, if my training isn't working, i'll hit you in the head with a hammer. plain and simple. or pull my own gun out. what? the gangsters can do it. shoot i'll do it to if i have to. i'm sure you all could think of a hundred different ways to protect yourself agianst that but i doubt it. i would rather share the mentality if needed of a gang mamber or "bad guy" to win the conflict.
> 
> ...




I grew up in a nice little house, in a nice neighborhood. 

I was one of the guy that never liked to hurt people, and so others would push and attack me until I hurt someone. They were all like this rabid bunch of monkeys, watching the gorilla get made. It was all ok, unless you were the one I lost it on, and in the end they still laughed at the guy (* and one female bully a few years older than I *) who would get hurt. At one time or another they all felt the pain. 

Now is this learning to survive and being shot at and dealing with knives and being hit by a car and multiple opponents? Nothing really.

But you see while I was good in school and was college prep and also in college, I was also stupid and put myself in places that most people do not survive.  So, yes, I have had guns pulled on me and I have been shot at standing still and also had the back of a friends Monte Carlo shot out, I have been stabbed and beaten, and hit by a car and a full size truck and blazer, and learned how to climb them to avoid some of the pain of impact. 

What works in a fight is doing what you know how to do. Many run away. Were they cowards? Maybe? Did they survive? YES THEY DID! Do they have dents in bones, and try not to remember certain parts of their life? No they do not. 

So what works is doing what you know how to do well and doing it before they do it to you. Sometimes it is with a weapon, or improvised weapon, my favorite is still the tuna fish can I kicked in a parking lot right before three car loads of guys got out. Sometimes it is hurting them or if multiple them one or more really fast and really bad or as bad as possible, to make them think or hesitate. 

As to pulling your weapon out, and getting an improvised weapon from my experience, if it is not in your hands when the situation starts, you will not be able to get it out in time. One time I dealt with 6 people, (* Got lucky someone came in and grabbed one so I only had 5 :rollseyes: *) we went up and down and even through a plate glass window, (* I kept rolling to avoid gettign cut they did not and got cut up some *), I then talked them to their car (* The police still had not responded, busy with other calls *), one gets into a car, the others attack me again, I step between parked cars to try to limit access to me good idea at the time. Once again I got lucky, for I saw a flash of metal or something and turned towards the one vehicle and the guy was trying to stab me. I passed and pulled him so his head hit the roof, and then disarmed. Now I had the weapon in my hands and his friends all stopped. (* Total elapsed time from first impact to then was actually about 3+ minutes, with most of that time walking them to theri car(s) *) The police were called before the first impact. Yet as I am standing there with the knife in my hands most of their group cut from broken glass, and one who had his face beat in by the other guy who disappeared, and the police roll in. Sweet  right? Nope now I have the weapon and the police have no idea what has happened since then. 

Long hours of talking to the police and later to the detectives, and later to an Assistant DA. What sold them was the fact that my own knife was still in my back pocket, (* NOTE: I never had a chance to get to it except when they were walking to their car and I did nto expect to need it. *) and was much larger to fit my hand then the one I had taken away. So at that point the police then started questioning the crowd. (* Once again most stated they attacked me and the knife came from the guy in the car. *) 

So while I understand the issue of surviving, and doing what one has to do to get through, it just does not come across well on the internet. People have no reason to believe anything, and if you have no others to back up your comments, then it is even harder. 

And yes I did my training on the street. Yet there are many times I really do think it might have been nice to have been the guy who just went to school and had never been in a real fight.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 18, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> O.K. Once again, you said (and again above) that your real fighting/sd experinces add up to a few minutes, which is exactly what I pointed out, so...there was no misunderstanding on my part.


 Actually you did misunderstand my point. I have no way of knowing the combined total time of all my "street" encounters. My point in saying that was that the combined total time of real self defense fights is very little compared to the combined total of training fights. I said that to show the value in training. You can condition yourself to fight for much longer than you will most likely need in an encounter. You can condition your body to be familiar with more punishment and pain than you will most likely need in an encounter, etc. I'm not saying real life or death fighting isn't valuable experience nor am I saying training is the exact equivalent to self defense fighting. What I did actually say was serious, realisitc training *can prepare you* for life or death encounters. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> As to your training, I didn't deny it, Just pointed out, it's all simulations of real situations. 3-5 minute round/ring fights....No comparrison at all to the real sd fight. (sorry) Also, paramedic training, great, I'm a first responder also, but, treating the wounded of fights, though noble, is irrelevant to this conversation.


 What your point? All training is simulations of real events. your applying some negative feelings towards simulations. Why is a simulation not able to prepare you for the real thing? This has been my point this whole thread. Not that life or death fighting isn't valid or valuable, but that training can prepare you for these encounters. I dont know how many more times I can say the same thing. 

It is relevent to this discussion becasue I brought it up to show what happens to peopel who insist on putting themselves in real life or death situations to test or validate themselves. They all end up, sooner or later, needing medical or funeral services. You test yourself in your training. You puch yourself past where you can normally go, you test your determination, skill, conditioning, etc, all in training, not in a life or death grudge match. That is when you survive. That is when you use your training to do whatever is needed to go home alive. Addressing life threatening situations as a test is just naive. Not to mention if you repeatedly look for life and death situations you might want to enlist the services of a good lawyer. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> As to the topic of the thread : BAR BRAWLING and S.D in general, there are those that do it for a living in the security industry. (They stop the trainers from getting beat to a pulp) Add to that,  coming from bad areas, where blades, bullets, and hand to hand experience is bountiful. Showing up to treat those people, not the same as doing what caused those injuries.


 I said there were not people who professional engage in life or death self defense situations. A bouncer is not the same thing, sorry if that messes with your "reality". Plain and simple, self defense is a completely different story than a bouncer engaging in a situation to stop it. I can't believe your even serious with that comment. I lived as a child and young teenager (my parents were missionsaries and lived in the "greatest of places") in 5th ward Houston Texas and the Ukraine....I have seen the "bad areas, where blades and bullets, and hand to hand experience is bountiful". What I'm saying, once again, is that there is training (maybe not the type your used to) that can prepare you for these situations. Also, while we are on this subject, I do carry a handgun (concealed liscense of course) for self defense. I thought we were addressing the type of situations where hand to hand combat was being used. In a real life or death situation I'm shooting and killing the attacker before he gets to me, but sometimes that may not happen so then I train for defending myself with my body. 

Certainly your not suggesting to be an effective self defense "fighter" (I use that term lightly because to me self defense is not the same as fighting) you must be stabbing, shooting, and injuring people? Are you? Thats where the beauty of simulation comes into play. I dotn have to actually stab a living person to learn how to stag with a blade. I dont shoot living people when I do moving target practice with my handgun...am I less of a self defense shooter then?



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> My view of reality blurry???  Your the one arguing "training", substituting that for Reality. Are you seeing straight? Two different definitions here dude. Reality and training aren't equal substitutes. Training is the practice of dealing with reality scenarions. (dry runs if you will)


 I never once said anything about substituting training for reality. Ok, one more time....what I did say was....training can prepare you for these situations. Wow, I've said that same thing alot this thread. One more thing, lets not make assumptions about each others "training". If you read back in the thread we discussed our training habits and you agreed mine was not what you would consider the norm. I dont bring up my training to bolster it, make me seem cool or any of that, but it supports my viewpoint so I'll make a statement about it. The type of fighting we do (using no padding) is anything but a "dry run" in my humble opinion. While I do not actually bleed out from the knife in my side I do see the red paint it left. While I dont get choked unconscious I do have to tap out and realize what that means. I get the cuts, black eyes, busted noses, etc from it and can continue on learning from that. In the "deadly streetz" you dont get that option. You can't learn from mistakes. You die from mistkes, so while you say your in to fighting life or death you obviously cant be actually fighting life or death or you would have either been killing alot of people or have been killed.

How many people have you killed?
How many time have you been killed?
If the answer is 0 to any of those questions, you my friend are engaging in "dry runs" as well. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Bottom line Training and REAL Experience are 2 different animals.


I agree 100%. I have this entire thread....I just believe one can prepare you for the other. 



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> The former I mentioned will shot or stab first and fight later. No training can prepare for that, as my old drill sargent used to say "In combat all this training doesn't mean ****, the three things you will remember are shoot, duck and run..." And sadly he was right, and there are several experts who agree with that fact. Read the links below...
> 
> I'm not going to say your training is useless, but training no matter what form it takes is never an end all be all...


 First, I never said any training was an end all be all. Wow, once again.....I said training can prepare you to handle these types of situations. 

To address your first issue, I'm one of those who will shoot first and fight later as well. But we are talking abotu different situations and encounters. I was under the impression we were all on the same page, talking about hand to hand combat past the point of escape, I was evidently wrong. 

Bottom line:
Odin is right, there is no reality in thinking you know what will happen on the street, that is why you train so hard and as realistic as possible, covering every possible scenario and situation you can. Does it cover everything, certainly not, but conditioning your mind to adapt to situations and problem solve, figuring things out will help you adapt your training to any situation. There is never any absolutes in a real life or death fight...the only absolute ( at least for me) is that I'm going to do whatever I can to get home alive and that includes what I train to do. See, realistic training to me is bringing out the hammer and knifes and such.

Training includes getting padded up (for some, I personally dont use much padding) and fighting. Do this with people you train with, people you dont train with, people who practice MA, people who dont practice any MA, etc. That is training....and it will be your best friend when you find yourself getting pummled out in the alley behind your favorite resturant. 

Just my own opinions,
 7sm


----------



## cfr (Jul 18, 2006)

I wouldn't do it for two reasons. 

1; I don't want to get hurt.
2; I don't want to hurt anyone else.

One of them would happen for sure.


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 18, 2006)

painstain said:
			
		

> i'd like to know how many of you actually grew up on the streets, dealing with gangs in the only way you can, overwhelming force and violence. did any of you grow up scrappin or is it just some fantasy.
> 
> in a street fight, if my training isn't working, i'll hit you in the head with a hammer. plain and simple. or pull my own gun out. what? the gangsters can do it. shoot i'll do it to if i have to. i'm sure you all could think of a hundred different ways to protect yourself agianst that but i doubt it. i would rather share the mentality if needed of a gang mamber or "bad guy" to win the conflict.
> 
> ...


 
with respect stain - Yeah, I lived for several years trapped between Section 8 and North East Baltimore.  I walked home every night through Patterson Park.  And not one person I ever met acted as you suggest, cause we all knew it was a quick trip to the morgue.  That's the whole point of gangs - kill one and one hundred come after you and your family.  Now I really do respect what your saying here.  It was just as bad to be a willing victim.  The meek inherit ****.

for the purposes of this thread - do you really think it would be anything other than suicidal to set up a boxing ring for a no holds bared "test" @ a place like 34th st. in Baltimore?

I Gau-ran-****in-tee that it would end in gunfights and bloodshed.  Hell, they wouldn't wait for you to set it up - if you don't belong there you get one chance to get the hell out - in the form of a subtle flash of the dealers peice.  After that, it's shoot first ask questions later.

To sum it up - I've had my share of street altercations - I wasn't always able to avoid them, but ALL of my real training happened in a safe environment.  You will never convince me that a person can not prepare for real combat through good training in a dojo, gym, or what have you because I'm living proof that it can work.

Where I do agree with you and others is that many people are not ready for real combat because their training really isn't that good - but location of said training has little to nothing to do with that.  Self defense is about winning however you can, and many people just don't train for it.


----------



## Dark (Jul 18, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> First, I never said any training was an end all be all. Wow, once again.....I said training can prepare you to handle these types of situations.


 
No training can ever prepare you for these types of situations, there is no formula or static method for the way people can and will come at you. Like in one of those articles I posted for you to read, there is a difference between a fight with the average joe and a street fight with a real streetfighter.

Now I was asumed you had a concept of street fighting and common brawling. Not all fights that acure outside of a ring or dojo can be considered street fights.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> To address your first issue, I'm one of those who will shoot first and fight later as well. But we are talking abotu different situations and encounters. I was under the impression we were all on the same page, talking about hand to hand combat past the point of escape, I was evidently wrong.


 
I think the discussion went from bar brawling to street fighting and the whole hand to hand concept got lost.



			
				7star mantis said:
			
		

> Bottom line:
> Odin is right, there is no reality in thinking you know what will happen on the street, that is why you train so hard and as realistic as possible, covering every possible scenario and situation you can. Does it cover everything, certainly not, but conditioning your mind to adapt to situations and problem solve, figuring things out will help you adapt your training to any situation. There is never any absolutes in a real life or death fight...the only absolute ( at least for me) is that I'm going to do whatever I can to get home alive and that includes what I train to do. See, realistic training to me is bringing out the hammer and knifes and such.


 
I hate to tell you this but there are absolutes and rules in the so called "street." 90% of experienced "street people" know how to spot the real big bad wolves and how to avoid them. There is a level of respect, understanding and the basic concept of avoiding issues with the real dangerous people.

I'll put experience over training anyday of the week, experience is a hard teacher but the guys with experience can play "weakling" roles, and use that to set up the wonna bes. I agree with allot of what you've said, actually all of what you said but in the limited context of training. But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Training includes getting padded up (for some, I personally dont use much padding) and fighting. Do this with people you train with, people you dont train with, people who practice MA, people who dont practice any MA, etc. That is training....and it will be your best friend when you find yourself getting pummled out in the alley behind your favorite resturant.


 
Well if your dumb enough to be in a dark alley or any alley to get pummled all I'll say your own fault for being stupid. In the area of fighting purely, you are 100% correct. But, in the area of knowing, understanding and being comfortable with the situation, it takes more then training it takes experience. At least someone with real experience to teach you.

Now if you are one of the very few people who is lucky enough to have an experienced and well seasoned x-streetfighter teaching you, then you are 100% right through and though but that is very rare and you are not getting the average training. But there is a difference between knowing and doing so no matter what experience is part of the equasion. Back to my point, not everyone trains the same or knows the same dirty tricks, as bad as this sounds I carry "glass knives" with me to clubs, to beat the metal detecters. Simply because I know there is going to be someone else there who will as well and if I'm wrong better safe then sorry.


----------



## Dark (Jul 18, 2006)

Adept said:
			
		

> If I may...
> 
> What I believe Mr Mantis is trying to say is that someone who has no actual exerience, but a good deal of competent training can engage succesfully in a physical confrontation.
> 
> Now experience is certainly an incredibly valuable learning tool, but it _is_ possible to come out on top 'on the street' without it.


 
Yeah divine intervention, dumb luck and everyone makes mistakes lines all substitute for experience as well, none are proven to last forever. I'm not saying training is meaningless or it has no effect but it needs to be the right kind of training. What most people consider the "street," simply isn't. Most people lob, friendly bar brawls, soccer fighters and anywhere with two drunk slobs pounding on each as street fights or the street. Thats all just common poor and low class America...


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 18, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Anyway I will go leave you boys alone to play.. sounds like um.. mentalk to me  pffft.. ha!


Jenna, yep  bingo, I can't disagree at this juncture! 

Respects!



I dunno. There's me thinking I created this here thread as a beautifully prosaic piece of literature; a work of art full of blissful intricate subtleties and glistening universal truths; a holy shining-light born-again muse for the martial arts if you will. Now look! You've all turned it into a goddamn monstrosity. What is wrong with you people? A curse on your heads, Philistines!

I'll take yous all, then we'll see! Oh ya think this is a joke? Come on then... step up. Hehe   come on!  :lol2: 

Anyway, what's that smell? *sniffs* Someone brought a dog in?


----------



## Cirdan (Jul 18, 2006)

Inviting people on the StreeT(TM) to a round in a mobile fight ring kinda defeats the purpose of proving your StreeT-EffectivenesS(TM)
Oh, and look how big my **** is!


----------



## painstain (Jul 18, 2006)

i think my point was, its not the training you need, you need the stomach to do the job.

and yes, i grew up in denver in a trailer park that rested between 225 and 6 complexes of projects. i was a minority being white in my school and was one of those kids that got their shoes coat and hat took weekly. what did i do, i stopped wearing **** that they wanted... do you think it stopped them no it just uncushened the beating. i have jagged scars all over my head from brass knucks and a scar on my back from being stabbed. but we aren't comparing scars here. the streets don't require martial arts, just common sense or complete psychoness. i  just got crazy. quit school and joined a gang. did that stop me from getting attacked all the time, no. it just got me beat more severely when i decided to get out of it. beleive it or not, most gang members don't have the balls to kill anyone. there are millions of em all over the world and only a handful are responsible for musrders... but like i've heard in so many ways, there are a hell of alot of worse things than dying. being bullied to the point of craziness is one of them. i delt with certain thugs in ways that i would never admit to another soul. but i never ended a life doing it. but i'm only alive because i was crazier and crueler than most of the punks i had to deal with. can't say i'd change anything looking back on it now. i am also very talented in our martial arts system, but can't say i'd use any of it on the streets. the streets isn't the same as the drunks in the bar. nor is it the same as the idiot that is trying to rob 711 for 30 dollars. i must say, in gatting jumped by multiple attackers, besides the pain, it was a great adrinaline rush, sometimes enjoyable, but thats just me. 

with respect,
painstain


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 18, 2006)

painstain said:
			
		

> i think my point was, its not the training you need, you need the stomach to do the job.
> 
> with respect,
> painstain



Now there's something we agree on - you got to know you can do it, and then you've got _*to actually do it*_.  But maybe I'm a lone voice here, cause I never would have made it without my training- it was what gave me the skills AND the mindset to use those skills to survive.  And I got it in a gym.


----------



## Dark (Jul 18, 2006)

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> Now there's something we agree on - you got to know you can do it, and then you've got _*to actually do it*_. But maybe I'm a lone voice here, cause I never would have made it without my training- it was what gave me the skills AND the mindset to use those skills to survive. And I got it in a gym.


 
Thats something I can't say for myself, my earily childhood scarred to become anti-social and violent. I already had the drive and stomach for the "job" my training took me on a completely different path away from violence. Now I have choice, thats my difference.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 18, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> No training can ever prepare you for these types of situations, there is no formula or static method for the way people can and will come at you. Like in one of those articles I posted for you to read, there is a difference between a fight with the average joe and a street fight with a real streetfighter.


 Ok, lets again define the terms we are using. Obviously you take the word "prepare" as meaning the ability to deal with the exact attack or movement of would be assailents. Thats not how I'm using it. Preparing for life or death situations is not a formula or static method. If formula or static method describes your training, maybe that is unrealistic training? There most certainly is a difference between fighting an "average joe" and a "real streetfighter"....the problem is your still speaking of fighting. I'm talking about surviving a life or death situation. The very term "streetfighter" describes someone who fights on the street. Who fights often. I'm talking about either being killed or killing. Big difference, we are simply discussing different things. 



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Now I was asumed you had a concept of street fighting and common brawling. Not all fights that acure outside of a ring or dojo can be considered street fights.


 Very true...once again your approaching it from a fight standpoint. I'm not talking about "common brawling" and "streetfighting". We have come to discuss life or death situations which cannot be described with either the wrods "common", "brawl", or "streetfight". Enough with the idolizing of the "str33tz". 



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> I hate to tell you this but there are absolutes and rules in the so called "street." 90% of experienced "street people" know how to spot the real big bad wolves and how to avoid them. There is a level of respect, understanding and the basic concept of avoiding issues with the real dangerous people.


 Ok, there are rules, there aren't rules, there are rules....which is it? You just said:





			
				Dark said:
			
		

> there is no formula or static method for the way people can and will come at you.


 :idunno:

Your description of "streetfighters" is incorrect. You may be describing people who enjoy getting into scraps outside on the road, but its naive to try and label the person who might attack you. You simply can't "spot the real big bad wolfs" like it or not. You can't determine who is carrying a concealed weapon with the determination to shoot and kill you. Respect is a two way street, I share it with no one who is going to attack me and try to kill me. Your talking about "gang" type life where survival among many is key, I'm talking about a life or death situation where I'm going to actually snatch the life from someone. Big huge amazing difference.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> I'll put experience over training anyday of the week, experience is a hard teacher but the guys with experience can play "weakling" roles, and use that to set up the wonna bes. I agree with allot of what you've said, actually all of what you said but in the limited context of training. But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.


 Yes, but your also saying training cannot give you experience and thats false. Once again however I'll restate my point on experience:


			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> How many people have you killed?
> How many times have you been killed?


 If your answer to either question is zero, then you have no experience in that matter. I have experience in protecting myself in a real life or death situation, I incapacitated the attackers and went home. I do not however value that small one time encounter over my training. I used the smallest, most basic, least energy required techniques to end that situation fairly quickly and to my advantage. I've bene in other situations where I've been cut and had to run and hide for my life. I also used my training there to determine to survive, run while in pain, dodge nad hide, etc. If training holds no merrit, lets just send our police and EMT out to these "str33tz" the first day of class.

This quote right here:





			
				Dark said:
			
		

> But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.


 Is the most ridiculous thing I have read to date in this thread. However, it does hold merrit when discussing fighting....I'm talking about self defense.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Well if your dumb enough to be in a dark alley or any alley to get pummled all I'll say your own fault for being stupid. In the area of fighting purely, you are 100% correct. But, in the area of knowing, understanding and being comfortable with the situation, it takes more then training it takes experience. At least someone with real experience to teach you.


 So it takes experience, but then it doesn't if your being taught by someone with experience? Which is it? If it truly takes experience over training, what can you learn through training with someone who has experience? If it doesn't than you just made a point for training. I'm confused as to your point here. I think we are discussing different things here. Yes it takes experience to understand and be comfortable with these situations, but training can prepare you to act accordingly to survive and gain said experience. However, when discussing true life or death self defense there are far too many variables to say experience has any higher percentage of survival over training. That is the bottom line. There is nothing to suggest that an experienced street fighter will survive more than a trained self defense martial artist in life or death fights. Nothing.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Now if you are one of the very few people who is lucky enough to have an experienced and well seasoned x-streetfighter teaching you, then you are 100% right through and though but that is very rare and you are not getting the average training. But there is a difference between knowing and doing so no matter what experience is part of the equasion. Back to my point, not everyone trains the same or knows the same dirty tricks, as bad as this sounds I carry "glass knives" with me to clubs, to beat the metal detecters. Simply because I know there is going to be someone else there who will as well and if I'm wrong better safe then sorry.


 Wait, I was wrong up till now, but if I have an x-streetfighter as a teacher I'm now correct? I never said experience was not part of the equation, I simply argued that training wsa part of the equation. I really dont understand your reasoning here at all. I could be right or wrong depending on the past experiences of my teacher? Thats ridiculous.

7sm


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 18, 2006)

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> But maybe I'm a lone voice here, cause I never would have made it without my training- it was what gave me the skills AND the mindset to use those skills to survive. And I got it in a gym.



This is the bottom line of my point. The training gives you the needed skills to survive. It isn't a static forumla to defend X technique with Y technique, but an alive changing skill set.

Great Post!!

7sm


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 18, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> I said there were not people who professional engage in life or death self defense situations. A bouncer is not the same thing, sorry if that messes with your "reality". Plain and simple, self defense is a completely different story than a bouncer engaging in a situation to stop it. I can't believe your even serious with that comment.
> 
> 
> How many people have you killed?
> ...


 

Yes. We agree that training has value and can prepare you. In fact, I already stated that. What I am arguing is that to the topic of bar brawling/ sd you'll never know for sure you can do it, unless you actually do it. That's it.

For professional life and deathers..again you're wrong. Bouncers, security, LEO's and military people do do it for a living. When someone has a weapon, that's pulled all of the sudden....Sorry, but, that's a life and death situation. Defending yourself physically is defending yourself, no matter what definition you want to use. 

As for the killing issue, again, not relevant to this thread. Again, Dry runs is training, fighting or sd is the reality. Yes, I do and have done both.

Lastly, YES! You can spot the big bad wolves. Would be predators do it all the time seeking out the least resistance, from grade school on up. That is fact!  Besides, the professions that I mentioned do make a living at doing just that. So, I can't believe you're serious with that comment.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 18, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Here's a good rule of thumb: If someone is saying, "this is how it is on the street" then it's probably:
> :bs:


 
You can say that to those that make ridculous claims. However, there are those of us here in these forums that have come up on the streets, and do know how it is. You can learn from these people.


----------



## Kreth (Jul 19, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> You can say that to those that make ridculous claims. However, there are those of us here in these forums that have come up on the streets, and do know how it is. You can learn from these people.


Let's just say I have past experience with one poster here, and his background story has been shot full of holes before. Of course, that was before he reinvented himself as a Bad-*** Street Fighter (tm).


----------



## Odin (Jul 19, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> This is the bottom line of my point. The training gives you the needed skills to survive. It isn't a static forumla to defend X technique with Y technique, but an alive changing skill set.
> 
> Great Post!!
> 
> 7sm


 
Amen!


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 19, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Yes. We agree that training has value and can prepare you. In fact, I already stated that. What I am arguing is that to the topic of bar brawling/ sd you'll never know for sure you can do it, unless you actually do it. That's it.


 I can agree with that, but not having done it doesn't mean you can't do it. Thats my point. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> For professional life and deathers..again you're wrong. Bouncers, security, LEO's and military people do do it for a living. When someone has a weapon, that's pulled all of the sudden....Sorry, but, that's a life and death situation. Defending yourself physically is defending yourself, no matter what definition you want to use.


 Your talking about people who put themselves in that situation for a specific reason, not anything close to the citizen who get attacked. There are laws and rules governing these professionals. Ask any LEO if the same laws apply to them restraining a "suspected" criminal (inocent until proven guilty and all) and me (a citizen) defending my life. Its just a whole different scenario with different intent for these professionals versus the citizen who gets attacked. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> As for the killing issue, again, not relevant to this thread. Again, Dry runs is training, fighting or sd is the reality. Yes, I do and have done both.


 Not relevant to a self defense thread? Are you serious? Yes SD is reality, but the true reality is that you gain and learn the sklls and mindset to take action in a SD situation through training. 

Wait, you have both killed someone and been killed by someone? Thats amazing, maybe I should bow out now, thats certainly nothing I can say I have done. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Lastly, YES! You can spot the big bad wolves. Would be predators do it all the time seeking out the least resistance, from grade school on up. That is fact! Besides, the professions that I mentioned do make a living at doing just that. So, I can't believe you're serious with that comment.


 I didn't say you couldn't spot people who can fight or are trained, or who have certain intent, but you can't seriously pick out who is or is not a threat and be accurate and correct. Thats just not true. You can go through some training (uh oh, that word again) to learn to spot potential "big bad wolves" but living on the assumption you can pick out who is the threat is a dangerous game to play, one that you will be wrong on at some point, sooner or later. Ask any LEO and see what they tell you about their profession. They dont pick out who is a threat, who is not a threat and hinge their actions on those assumptions. Those are tools for handling situations, they are not static forumlas or methods for determining who is a threat or not. 

7sm


----------



## Dark (Jul 19, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Ok, lets again define the terms we are using. Obviously you take the word "prepare" as meaning the ability to deal with the exact attack or movement of would be assailents. Thats not how I'm using it. Preparing for life or death situations is not a formula or static method. If formula or static method describes your training, maybe that is unrealistic training? There most certainly is a difference between fighting an "average joe" and a "real streetfighter"....the problem is your still speaking of fighting. I'm talking about surviving a life or death situation. The very term "streetfighter" describes someone who fights on the street. Who fights often. I'm talking about either being killed or killing. Big difference, we are simply discussing different things.


 
Go to Iraq if you want kill or be killed, in a real world there is a limit and you need to know that limit, legally and mentally or else you lose.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Ok, there are rules, there aren't rules, there are rules....which is it? You just said: :idunno:


 
There are no rules to the fight, but there are "codes of conduct" among thugs, bullies, and criminals that will come into play adding up to that point.





			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Your description of "streetfighters" is incorrect. You may be describing people who enjoy getting into scraps outside on the road, but its naive to try and label the person who might attack you. You simply can't "spot the real big bad wolfs" like it or not. You can't determine who is carrying a concealed weapon with the determination to shoot and kill you. Respect is a two way street, I share it with no one who is going to attack me and try to kill me. Your talking about "gang" type life where survival among many is key, I'm talking about a life or death situation where I'm going to actually snatch the life from someone. Big huge amazing difference.


 
You said this was about life or death right? That is the very nature of streetfighting, its not idolizing or fun. You can spot the knife fighters and the guys who are strapped in most cases, they are the only ones no scared. Everyone else pretty much is and if there not they are usually fresh meat, as the term goes.

I think the term is body language and visiual ques, you know to tell who is armed and who isn't. Oh by the way the guy who is going to stab you is one guy you don't know who is smiling at you... 



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Yes, but your also saying training cannot give you experience and thats false. Once again however I'll restate my point on experience:
> If your answer to either question is zero, then you have no experience in that matter. I have experience in protecting myself in a real life or death situation, I incapacitated the attackers and went home. I do not however value that small one time encounter over my training. I used the smallest, most basic, least energy required techniques to end that situation fairly quickly and to my advantage. I've bene in other situations where I've been cut and had to run and hide for my life. I also used my training there to determine to survive, run while in pain, dodge nad hide, etc. If training holds no merrit, lets just send our police and EMT out to these "str33tz" the first day of class.


 
They do they are called rookies and they usually go out with an older cop who knows when to break and when the follow the book. 



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> This quote right here: Is the most ridiculous thing I have read to date in this thread. However, it does hold merrit when discussing fighting....I'm talking about self defense.


 
The reason the quote about having an instructor who is used to and knows what and how criminals think seems ridiculous is because you don't know these things first hand yourself. I suppose by the same logic a Ballet Dancer can teach you effective kick boxing, without having ever learned to kick box hinself? Same princible the "street smarts" plus MA (take your pick), makes a reasonibly successful combination. Just like some boxers and kick boxers have taken ballet to grasp a better feel for balance and grace in their techniques.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> So it takes experience, but then it doesn't if your being taught by someone with experience? Which is it? If it truly takes experience over training, what can you learn through training with someone who has experience?


 
Some with experience to teach you the things you'll learn the "hard way" but unltimately you'll have to do it and reflect on doing it, to understand it.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> I could be right or wrong depending on the past experiences of my teacher? Thats ridiculous.


 
Simple if you're there to learn streetfighting and your teacher was a street fighter, you would be learning things beyond techniques that relate to street fighting. If your teacher has the experience and knowledge to teach you to fight, that fine it falls into the millions of successful martial arts instructors all over the world. If your instructor has the experience as a street fighter and has the knowledge of a martial artist, and teaches "street-smarts" with martial arts then your training may infact help to prepare you for a worst case senario in self-defense situations. Does that explain it better or do what the perverbial magic pill?


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 19, 2006)

I've been reading the last several pages of this post avidly and find many things said by all parties to be true in my personal experiences, but I would like to add my own opinion to the theme of recognizing the big bad wolf and street fights vs. bar brawls.

I find that you really *can not* recognize the big bad wolves without experience - there's just no escaping the benefit of experience here.  But once you know what it is you're seeing - notice I didn't say looking for, but actually seeing - They stand out pretty clear.  They're the ones who don't look down when you make contact - they stare back harder.  They also tend to be watching everything at once just like we're trained to do, looking for threats and marks.  I learned to see them by "reverse engineering", ie. this guy just emptied a pistol into a car cause they honked at him, how was he acting before that? (true story)


Back to the premise of the thread - I just can't shake this image of four 13 year olds with pistols just opening up on the streetfighter(TM) set up, spraying 80 rounds all over the street.

As for street vs. bar brawl.... well I'll put it like this;  In a bar brawl, the one you have to look out for is the one who doesn't seem to care - he's holding.  On the street, after dark you can reliably assume they're ALL holding, and that's a huge difference.  The bar brawler uses it if he needs to, the street thug uses it period.

These are JMHO, but it held true for me.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 19, 2006)

There are so many assumptions and niave descriptions in this thread, I dont know where to start. First, you simply cannot assume you are right, ever. Assumptions are what get people killed. Read "Deep Survival" [SIZE=-1]by Laurence Gonzales...gives some great idea on assumption (conscious or unconscious).
Everyone is saying, you can pick out who is the threat, who is carrying, etc. You can to a point, but you can't pick out who is not carrying, who is not a threat, etc. Also, you can't base your actions on your assumptions, legally or morally. The idea that you know who the threat is because of stares and head placement is absurd. While it does give you good clues and can allow you to avoid situations that might have proven you correct, it is simply not a basis of action, legally or morally. 

Let me address some of the quotes here:
[/SIZE]





			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Go to Iraq if you want kill or be killed, in a real world there is a limit and you need to know that limit, legally and mentally or else you lose.


 This is the mentality difference I was refering to. As an adult I'm not going to fight you unless I think my life or wellbeing is in danger (or that of my wife or family). Your mentality is that of a fighter who fights to win to prove something, be seen, or prove legitimacy. I'm talking about fighting to stop yourself from being killed. I know the limits that apply, thats why I carry my concealed handgun. I know the limits that apply there and what I can and cannot do with lethal force, thats why I make the points I make. Mentally, I'm fighting for my life everytime...I am not responsible for nor will I hesitate to determine the attackers intent. If I feel threatened I will react, big bad wolf or not. We are simply discussing differnt things intent wise. No big deal, we just have to realize that and agree to disagree.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> There are no rules to the fight, but there are "codes of conduct" among thugs, bullies, and criminals that will come into play adding up to that point.


 First, I'm not a thug, bully, or criminal, so we share no code or rule. I've come a long way in my life from where I started, I'm not going to let anyone take that from me. Its naive to determine or base your action on the supposed "code of conduct" of a criminal. Again though, I'm talking about pure self defense, not measuring up who the best fighter is and taking on only those less skilled than him. I'm not "taking on anyone" I'm going to defend whomever attempts to "take on" me.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> You said this was about life or death right? That is the very nature of streetfighting, its not idolizing or fun. You can spot the knife fighters and the guys who are strapped in most cases, they are the only ones no scared. Everyone else pretty much is and if there not they are usually fresh meat, as the term goes.
> 
> I think the term is body language and visiual ques, you know to tell who is armed and who isn't. Oh by the way the guy who is going to stab you is one guy you don't know who is smiling at you...


 Again, false assumptions and suppositions. You could have fooled me with the idolized part...seems thats what this thread is full of. while what you are saying here about spotting people carrying may be true in some cases it is not true across the board and has no set percentage of correctness on which to base your beliefs or actions. I've lived around several gangs both american and russian and I see huge mistakes in your categorization of their body language. While it may hold true in some cases, it is not accurate enough to base your actions on. What if you see the scared guy, go for him and he pulls out the gun you didn't see and while being scared shoots you in the head? You just can't place a "method" or "static formula" to these kinds of things.....you said that yourself earlier, and now your trying to do that same thing. Also, the chances of you being surrounded by a gang full of enough members to carry these listed attributes is slim to none, unless its your fault for being in that situation in the first place.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> They do they are called rookies and they usually go out with an older cop who knows when to break and when the follow the book.


 Actually no these "rookies" have been through extensive training before ever setting foot on the "beat". Oh, and your fantastical notion of "knowing when to break the book" is not condusive to good LEOs.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> The reason the quote about having an instructor who is used to and knows what and how criminals think seems ridiculous is because you don't know these things first hand yourself.


 First of all, lets not get into labeling or describing things we know nothing about each other, eh? Its ridiculous because...well let me quote it again:


			
				Dark said:
			
		

> But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.


 Its just not true that you can't learn anything about fighting situation unless your learning from an ex-biker (what does riding a motorcycle have to do with it?) or a street fighter. Thats why I said it was ridiculous. I think there are some ex-bikers who might take offense to you saying they are all fighters. 



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Some with experience to teach you the things you'll learn the "hard way" but unltimately you'll have to do it and reflect on doing it, to understand it.


 So can you learn it in training or not? That is the crux of our disagreement. You are contradicting yourself.



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Simple if you're there to learn streetfighting and your teacher was a street fighter, you would be learning things beyond techniques that relate to street fighting. If your teacher has the experience and knowledge to teach you to fight, that fine it falls into the millions of successful martial arts instructors all over the world. If your instructor has the experience as a street fighter and has the knowledge of a martial artist, and teaches "street-smarts" with martial arts then your training may infact help to prepare you for a worst case senario in self-defense situations. Does that explain it better or do what the perverbial magic pill?


 I'm assuming you meant "proverbial" not "preverbial" but I'm still not sure what your trying to say. See, agian we are discussing different things. Your still talking about streetfighting while I'm refering to life or death self defense. So now we agree that training can prepare you for these "worst case scenarios"? I'm confused, you disagreed earlier, and now you agree? 

Bottom Line:
Nothing is ever certain in a real self defense situation. This includes training or experience. You cannot set a true or false basis to alive realistic fighting. We have seen that training can and does increase your skill set needed to survive dangerous situations and we have seen that experience increases those same skills. Which is better? Which is worth spending your time on? Which should come first? These are all questions each person must answer themselves and design their own method of training. Just dont ever get comfortable and substitute realism for fantasy...thats the dangerous part. Its hard to keep your training as realistic as possible....try your best.

7sm


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jul 19, 2006)

> However, there are those of us here in these forums that have come up on the streets, and do know how it is


 
been there, walked those streets for years, been in those bars, seen way to much happen at times.

Having been in the streests and bars and knowing and associating with bikers, gang members, police, you name it I will only say that I have had to survive a couple of times and I used the training i had been given to do so. And yes this was sometimes static traning and light contact but i learned techniques that where able to keep me in one peace. 
  what i learned in the street was  shutting my mouth and just looking into a persons eyes with respect but no fear and knowing it could go all to hell in a heart beat and that my life might depend on what happned the next minute


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 19, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> I can agree with that, but not having done it doesn't mean you can't do it. Thats my point.
> 
> Your talking about people who put themselves in that situation for a specific reason, not anything close to the citizen who get attacked. There are laws and rules governing these professionals. Ask any LEO if the same laws apply to them restraining a "suspected" criminal (inocent until proven guilty and all) and me (a citizen) defending my life. Its just a whole different scenario with different intent for these professionals versus the citizen who gets attacked.
> 
> ...


 
O.k to the first sentence. I would agree with your point also. 

To your second point: I say what's the difference really? A fight is a fight! If I'm boucing say and get into, after trying to talk a way out of it, and eventually a knife, bottle, etc.. comes into play.. What is different between me and a citizen in the same cirumstance? If I, or anyone is defending themselves, It's the same for everyone..PERIOD!

Your third reponse. The thread was talking about Bar Brawling. You brought the "have you killed" question. Totally different topic. What I do and have done was not addressed to the killing issue. I answered that in the first sentence. It addressed dry runs (training) and Self defense/fighting.

Lastly. Yes!!!!  You can pick ou those who are or not threats. You seem to divide definitions in your arguments. Aren't those that can fight, are trained, or have intent truly the big bad wolves? You better believe they are! They are the threats if they are in a negative state of mind! That aside, I and many others, *even you*, have done, or do it. It has nothing to do with training either. I know that's really hard for you to swallow. But, you can't teach it, No formulas etc.. You only gain it through REAL EXPERIENCES, over time. You're right about it being a dangerous game though. It's more dangerous, no matter where you're at, NOT to be able to notice the "players". If you're wrong on an assumption and they are not a big bad wolf, fine! They'll be less of a threat and problem. It's a failure to notice and recognize that gets you into trouble! I would think that someone like you who claims to have....."street cred" coming from "those" areas would know better than to make those statements. I guarantee,  if you really did do, what you say you did, you did exactly what you say you can't, constantly. After all, Isn't AWARENESS the goal?


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 19, 2006)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> been there, walked those streets for years, been in those bars, seen way to much happen at times.
> 
> Having been in the streests and bars and knowing and associating with bikers, gang members, police, you name it I will only say that I have had to survive a couple of times and I used the training i had been given to do so. And yes this was sometimes static traning and light contact but i learned techniques that where able to keep me in one peace.
> what i learned in the street was shutting my mouth and just looking into a persons eyes with respect but no fear and knowing it could go all to hell in a heart beat and that my life might depend on what happned the next minute


 
Amen to that!


----------



## Odin (Jul 20, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Amen to that!


 
see i agree with that too.


----------



## MJS (Jul 20, 2006)

Originally posted by Dark:



> 7starmatis, if I may interject for a minute, but are you serious? No amount of training, even the full-contact training as Odin suggested is comparable to the real world. And allot of the fights you will incounter in the real world won't be from experienced street fighters, bikers or hard-core criminal types but the average joe.


 
I think I agree with you to a point with this. I'd have to say and somewhere along the lines, I believe 7star said the same thing..IMO, alot of it is going to come down to how one gears their training. Now, going on what you said, if the majority of fights will not be from experienced people, but instead the average Joe, what makes you think that that training won' be effective? 



> But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.


 
So you're saying that unless we're taken under the wings of a biker, all of our training is useless? Sorry, I have to disagree with that. 



> There are no rules to the fight, but there are "codes of conduct" among thugs, bullies, and criminals that will come into play adding up to that point.


 
I'm far from a thug, bully or criminal and I certainly don't hang around with the like, so I'd have to say that I personally share nothing in common with these people.

I almost get the impression that you're idolizing bikers, criminals, etc., and walk around on a daily basis looking for or hoping that you'll have a confrontation, so as to prove something. No offense meant, but this is the impression that I get from reading many of your posts.  If that is the case, IMHO, I think that you've missed a great deal about what the arts are all about.

Mike


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 20, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> To your second point: I say what's the difference really? A fight is a fight! If I'm boucing say and get into, after trying to talk a way out of it, and eventually a knife, bottle, etc.. comes into play.. What is different between me and a citizen in the same cirumstance? If I, or anyone is defending themselves, It's the same for everyone..PERIOD!


  Well, no there is a whole different issue to pure self defense and fighting from a professional intent. There are differences in agenda, intent, legal restrictions, surroundings, understanding, and core reason for fighting. I agree to a point that the actually fighting of a person may hold some same characteristics in these two scenarios, but its not the same. As a bouncer getting into an altercation your intent is different and your willingly placing yourself in that situation. Also your intent is not to disable the customer or kill him, but simply de-esculate the issue and get them outside or to police custody. If you can't see the difference in pure self defense or "bar brawling" and the actions of professional bouncers I dont know what else to discuss. Now, I think I understand your point, being that a bouncer has a chance to really try out some of their techniques and skills on roudy patrons, but beyond that I disagree with it being the same. As a side note, I get to practice everything and way more on my training parterns than I ever could have legally or morally when I worked as a bouncer. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Your third reponse. The thread was talking about Bar Brawling. You brought the "have you killed" question. Totally different topic. What I do and have done was not addressed to the killing issue. I answered that in the first sentence. It addressed dry runs (training) and Self defense/fighting.


  Ok, along the progression of this thread we got into self defense. Thats where the killing issue has merit. If your talking about simply getting into "semi friendly" brawls for fun, we aren't discussing the same thing. I have said this several times in my last several posts. But, since you are addressing self defense fighting, the killing issue must be present. You can't seperate the intent of attackers to speak of "only self defense that wouldn't have ended in death". You can't know that or seperate it that way. There have been many deaths I have seen with my own eyes that were the product of "friendly bar brawling" that either got out of hand or caused an unforseen "accident". You can call training "dry runs" all you like, but the experience of an unwilling attacker is experience none the less....regardless of the intent of the attacker, place of attack, or friendship between persons. Learning to setup techniques in various scenarios with unwilling attackers who are actually trying to at the very least knock you out or choke you out is experience. I formally invite anyone who doesn't think so to come train with me and my training partners. It's an eye opener to many who think training is static, boring, and useless. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Lastly. Yes!!!! You can pick ou those who are or not threats. You seem to divide definitions in your arguments. Aren't those that can fight, are trained, or have intent truly the big bad wolves? You better believe they are! They are the threats if they are in a negative state of mind! That aside, I and many others, *even you*, have done, or do it. It has nothing to do with training either. I know that's really hard for you to swallow. But, you can't teach it, No formulas etc.. You only gain it through REAL EXPERIENCES, over time. You're right about it being a dangerous game though. It's more dangerous, no matter where you're at, NOT to be able to notice the "players". If you're wrong on an assumption and they are not a big bad wolf, fine! They'll be less of a threat and problem. It's a failure to notice and recognize that gets you into trouble! I would think that someone like you who claims to have....."street cred" coming from "those" areas would know better than to make those statements. I guarantee, if you really did do, what you say you did, you did exactly what you say you can't, constantly. After all, Isn't AWARENESS the goal?


 Ok, lets be clear about what I actually said. I said you can pick out people who are threats, but you simply cannot be sure. Also, you cannot pick out who is not a threat as again you have no wya of actually knowing. You can use your "training" (uh oh) to determine who you think carries the most or least threat, but to act solely upon thos assumptions is stupid in my opinion. I'm not ruling anyone out in self defense. You start acting upon your own assumptions and you start not only being wrong but having to accept the consequences of being wrong. In a pure self defense situation you may not get a second chance to be right or wrong. You simply cannot judge intent by looking. Some people you can, some you cannot....how do you decide who is which type of person? See this is a dangerously slippery slope to start basing actions on.

I never said it wasn't good practice to learn to spot potential problems but to put your confidence in these "educated guesses" is not smart. Your right, if you are wrong and they are not a threat, big deal. But take the other side of that issue, if your wrong and they are a threat........ Thats why I'm saying not to live on your assumptions, never rule anyone out based on your amazing wolf spotting skills. Its not a faliure to recognize that gets you in trouble all the time. Thast what I've been saying, your addressing this from a drunken fight because you looked at his girlfriend. I'm talking about being attacked in a real self defense situation that has passed all these preliminary escapes. 

I have never claimed "cred" of any kind. And I'm not sure what statements I've made that you think I should know better than. Lets not get too personal here, you really have no idea about me or my experiences. I never said you couldn't spot potential problem people, but you can't rely on that unreliable observation. You cannot be accurate past a guess on who is or is not a problem in everyday life where self defense happens. Once again, your talking about a situation where there are alot of people around, drinking, hormones, etc. That is a different situation than true life or death self defense from being attacked. You simply cannot walk down the streets of any major city and pick out the people who would attack you and the people who would not attack you and have any resemblence of accuracy....fact. You also cannot do the above scenario and pick out who would be more likely to "win" if attacking you than who you could "win" against. The pure realism of it is you cannot see concealed weapons (hence the name concealed), malicous intent, or simple decisions to attack. To believe you can is what I consider unrealistic training and confidence.


The bottom line is your talking about experience as some sort of physical skill and it isn't. Its a mental tool used as a part in the whole of self defense. Until I see these "big bad wolfs", "thugs" and "criminals" passing me in the 105 degree Texas heat on my 5 mile running routine including sprints and bodyweight training....I'm going to continue training. Seems your forgetting different parts of training and the benefits of it. If I have to outrun an attacker to survive, I'm pretty sure I could. If I couldn't I'll have to resort to my fighting skills I've learned over the many years. I may still loose, but I'm going to do my best with the combined skill and knowledge I have gained from training and experience in true self defense situations. I dont need to be attacked to see the benefit of my training. I fight for longer than any "streetfight" I have ever witnessed or heard of....but I guess thats useless against someone who just goes out and picks fights.

7sm


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 20, 2006)

Well, NO, there is not! At work, the street, or anywhere the agenda is the same for you, which is no violence. The legal restrictions? They apply to everyone, EVERYWHERE, at all times. Surroundings, in terms of what is happening (you being attacked!) is irrelevant( I know they in the BIG picture. I'm talking on the small moment here) The point is you are being attacked and you have to deal with it. (this addresses the understanding issue as well). The core reason for fighting? Again, to defend yourself. It applies anytime you have to do so, ANYWHERE.

As far as willingly placing yourself in that situation... in either of your scenarios, You have no choice but to act. The attackers decided that there was going to be an issue, so they do it willingly, not you. My intent, in a bar brawl or fight, or sd situation is ALWAYS the same. I WILL disable someone. (as a bouncer you have to do so too, to de-escalate, or, get them outside, once a fight has occurred, don't you?)

To your second opinion, To me, there is no "semi friendly" brawling. a fight with friends is totally different, but that's not what this thread implied or talked about. (nor was I) To the rest of it We agree! (by the way, death can occur during friends fighting too!)

Lastly. Training has very little to do with recognizing peiople who are threats. (and I never claimed it was a physical thing) It comes through time and EXPERIENCING in the real world, with real people, and situations. It can be done, even with the criteria you brought up. People, including you do it and have done it.
Training hardly ever comes close to what happens and can never cover all of the bases. Training occurs in a dojo, or whatever. It's agreed upon by the participants, both mentally, and physically, no matter what. The conditions are controlled and familiar. In the real world this is not so! The conditions change constantly, and, unlike training, you will be caught cold, or at best semi prepared. THEY will decide where, when and how, not you. (like you do in training)
Also, as far as judging, there is only one way one should view or decide initially. That they are a threat. There is no other side of the coin view.

I am not trying to get personal with you. If you are taking it that way, I'm sorry. We just have differing philosophies about things overall, but I think we agreed with each other's original points, didn't we?

Again I agree with traing, it's all most have, and it does prepare you, we agree on that. All I said was that it's only part of the picture, ultimately, and it can't stand alone FOR SURE, when it comes to the real stuff!


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 21, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Well, NO, there is not! At work, the street, or anywhere the agenda is the same for you, which is no violence. The legal restrictions? They apply to everyone, EVERYWHERE, at all times. Surroundings, in terms of what is happening (you being attacked!) is irrelevant( I know they in the BIG picture. I'm talking on the small moment here) The point is you are being attacked and you have to deal with it. (this addresses the understanding issue as well). The core reason for fighting? Again, to defend yourself. It applies anytime you have to do so, ANYWHERE.


 I'm trying to avoid a yes, no back and forth arguemnt so I'll try to lay out my point more clearly. While the basic agenda may be to keep yourself safe, the scenarios are much different. As far as legal issue, your incorrect, they are different according to your given situations. As a citizen attacked who can reasonably assume they are in fear for their life can legally bring into play lethal force. This means seriously injuring or killing the attacker (just like the legality of pulling a concealed handgun). A professional bouncer is not under the same legal standing as you willingly introduced yourself into the frey. You can't simply walk up to the person being rowdy and shoot them in the chest, thats manslaughter. As a bouncer you are there to keep order and thus legally undertake the danger of said job. In the setting of a rowdy patron or bar brawl you would be very hard pressed to prove lethal intent enough to justify lethal force such as crushing a windpipe, gouging eyes, damage to the spine or neck, even breaking bones and especially killing a person. You brought into the picture LEOs. Ask a couple about their legal restrictions. They can't see a fight and just start shooting people. There is a scale of force that must be followed and escalated in the case of these professional that is not present or atleast not as strict in the case of a citizen being attacked. These legal restrictions vary from state to state, but in my state as a citizen I can apply lethal force to a person trying to steal my TV, you think that is a justifiable response for a LEO?

I say all of this not to detract the thread from its original topic, but to show the reasoning behind my seperation of "real fighting" from that of a security personel to a citizen being attacked. There is a difference both morally and legally. I simply address self defense from the idea of being attacked, the other scenario (professional security personel) is not self defense but rather situational de-escalation procedures which could involve phsyical defense technqiues. The intent and purpose are differnet in these two scenarios. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> As far as willingly placing yourself in that situation... in either of your scenarios, You have no choice but to act. The attackers decided that there was going to be an issue, so they do it willingly, not you. My intent, in a bar brawl or fight, or sd situation is ALWAYS the same. I WILL disable someone. (as a bouncer you have to do so too, to de-escalate, or, get them outside, once a fight has occurred, don't you?)


 First off, No you do not have to as a bouncer. See my first response about the legalities of disabling a person as a bouncer. As a bouncer you have "willingly placed yourself in that situation" by working as a bouncer. I'm not saying your there t ofight, but the basis of your job is to keep order by physical means if neccessary. That does not place you in teh same boat as a citizen being attacked. You say the surroundigns dont matter but they do. Proving the legality of lethal force in a bar known for fights, with a patron who has had a drink or two where you might have had a drink or tow yourself is going to be much different than proving the legality of lethal force in a situation where your attacked with your wife/girlfriend in a park. This applies to legal issues as well as the level of intent and force. Now, dont get me wrong, anyone who reads my posts knows I am not in favor of fighting "less" or "lighter" in one situation versus the next, but there is a sliding scale of reasonable force that must be adheared to both morally and legally. If your saying you have to disable a person as a bouncer to get them outside that either means (to me) that you are not a bouncer, or are not a bouncer in the type of place that gets this type of attention. Or you just haven't had the proper training of acceptable force. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> To your second opinion, To me, there is no "semi friendly" brawling. a fight with friends is totally different, but that's not what this thread implied or talked about. (nor was I) To the rest of it We agree! (by the way, death can occur during friends fighting too!)


 I agree, death can occur in many situations, like what I said in my post. What I meant by "semi friendly bar fighting" was the type of fight over one guy looking at his girlfriend, or the drunken bravado chest bumping type stuff. That is not a situation to pull out your concealed handgun and start blasting away (especially if your carrying your gun in a bar). I'm simply not going to fight a drunken patron at a bar. I'll get up, walk away, leave, go find a bouncer, etc. Until the person puts their hands on me, I'm not doing a thing in that situation (in most cases there are always exceptions).



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Lastly. Training has very little to do with recognizing peiople who are threats. (and I never claimed it was a physical thing) It comes through time and EXPERIENCING in the real world, with real people, and situations. It can be done, even with the criteria you brought up. People, including you do it and have done it.


 I'll agree to a point here. You can be trained to recognize these types of things just as I took classes to recognize when a person was lying. It does take experiecne to really get good at it, but your training is what allows the experience to mean anything. I never claimed I dotn do it, what I said was that recognizing a potential threat is only one little piece of the puzzle. There are situations where your wife your wife or young child maybe, where you can recognize a potential threat but even if their intent is made known and they are approaching you to attack you, this "experience" you are talking about has played its role and is now useless. The situation has escalated past that level and now if you have no physical training, your in trouble. Dont make the mistake of boxing all training into one type. There are many different methods of training and avenues to train. there is the technique side, the phsyical conditioning, cardio, mental, bag rooms, etc. These all play a huge role in your success in self defense situations. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Training hardly ever comes close to what happens and can never cover all of the bases. Training occurs in a dojo, or whatever. It's agreed upon by the participants, both mentally, and physically, no matter what. The conditions are controlled and familiar. In the real world this is not so! The conditions change constantly, and, unlike training, you will be caught cold, or at best semi prepared. THEY will decide where, when and how, not you. (like you do in training)
> Also, as far as judging, there is only one way one should view or decide initially. That they are a threat. There is no other side of the coin view.


 I disagree. Your speaking of a certain type or method of training. Never covering all the basis is true, but that goes for experience as well. You will never be able to cover every angle. In fact, that is why in training you attempt to train areas that adapt to different situations. For instance, training your cardio and getting in a bag room isn't situationally valuable, it relates to any situation....this type of thing can be done in actual technique type training as well. We also train in conditions that are not controlled, familiar, etc. I think its a misconception to think the conditions really affect the base of your physical reactions and skills. If you train to react in a variety of situations and train to have a mental awareness and "readyness" then I dont think the conditions will haev as much affect as your making it sound. Your training should be in suhc a way to attempt to keep you from being caught cold. This is the "experience" you have been talking about coming into play. Is there ever the possibility of covering 100% of the situations...no, but you can train your body in such a way that it can adapt to different situations and conditions. That is why your trianing should be alive and changeing, not static and stale. 

As far as judging, if you truly believe what your saying about only seeing a threat, then why do you place so much importance on the experience of recognizing potential threats? You should allready be viewing everyone as a threat, no? If you view everyone as a possible threat, you dont have to worry about if your right or wrong, everyone is a threat and thus you prepared at all times. 



			
				Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Again I agree with traing, it's all most have, and it does prepare you, we agree on that. All I said was that it's only part of the picture, ultimately, and it can't stand alone FOR SURE, when it comes to the real stuff!


 I guess we do need to agree to disagree, because I believe if done correctly and realistically, your training can "stand alone" as far as preparing you to deal with self defense situations. Is it all it takes to be a great and respected streetfighter? Probably not, but then again that is very different from self defense isn't it. 

Bottom line:
 This is all about confidence or ego. Does bar brawling make your skills valid? Were they not valid before the bar brawl? Isn't it just to make you believe they are valid that you would need to test them? If what you train actually works did it have some lesser value before you catually used it on a "big bad wolf"? Was it not just a effective before that encounter as it is after? What is different about my training partner throwing a punch to my head trying to knock me out and a drunken custoemr at a bar throwing the same punch? Once it turns physical, yoru training is all that you have...experience is great, but doesn't give you any higher chance of curvival than "mere" training does.

7sm


----------



## painstain (Jul 21, 2006)

reading back on all this i must say i regret replying at all. i was reading it all and going through everyones points (you all have great points) but i started to wonder what would the masters say, or the grand masters. they would say just train. 

so if i could i would withdraw all my posts and say.... just train. 

with respect,
painstain


----------



## Dark (Jul 24, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> I'm far from a thug, bully or criminal and I certainly don't hang around with the like, so I'd have to say that I personally share nothing in common with these people.
> 
> I almost get the impression that you're idolizing bikers, criminals, etc., and walk around on a daily basis looking for or hoping that you'll have a confrontation, so as to prove something. No offense meant, but this is the impression that I get from reading many of your posts. If that is the case, IMHO, I think that you've missed a great deal about what the arts are all about.
> 
> Mike


 
No but I won't send a point fighter in TKD on to a wrestling mat. Same thing, unless you know the rules of the game, you can't effectively play it. Simply put; you train the way you fight, if you train for the so called "streets" you will be prepared for the "streets." (Provided you aren't being fed a bunch of BS).

I won't send a point fighter into a muay thai ring or a ballet dancer to the octagon, MA training Vs Street Effectiveness is the same deal.


----------



## MJS (Jul 24, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> No but I won't send a point fighter in TKD on to a wrestling mat. Same thing, unless you know the rules of the game, you can't effectively play it. Simply put; you train the way you fight, if you train for the so called "streets" you will be prepared for the "streets." (Provided you aren't being fed a bunch of BS).
> 
> I won't send a point fighter into a muay thai ring or a ballet dancer to the octagon, MA training Vs Street Effectiveness is the same deal.


 

Not sure, but are you addressing this quote:



> But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.


 
with the above reply?  If thats the case, then I guess you're saying that pretty much everyone out there that trains might as well stop, because they're wasting their time unless they're training with an ex con.  Sorry, again I have to disagree.  I get some quality training, which is very 'alive' with the people I train with and they're not ex cons.

Mike


----------



## Dark (Jul 24, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> with the above reply? If thats the case, then I guess you're saying that pretty much everyone out there that trains might as well stop, because they're wasting their time unless they're training with an ex con. Sorry, again I have to disagree. I get some quality training, which is very 'alive' with the people I train with and they're not ex cons.
> 
> Mike


 
That was the quote Mike, I'm not saying that the training is worthless. I'm saying you are attempting to compare apples to oranges. If you want to "street fight" you have to train with "street fighters" just like if you want to learn karate you must train with karateka.

If you are looking at raw self-defense the same applies in context, you could learn with a former LEO who can impart knowledge from experience. In a purely accademic context training in any MA teaches you good skills and effective techniques. In the context of the average joe, this guy has most likely been in a few scarps and knows how to fight. Thats not going to make him Joe Frazier, but he will know how to handle himself.

The worst case senario is these "street fighter types" who are infact very criminal minded and mentally ill, a karate cass or MMA class isn't going to teach you to deal with them. I made the mistake in only bringing up bikers and x-street fighters you can also pick up the same knowledge from former LEOs who have some experience under their belts. 

The point is the same no purely academic MA or SD program will work in the real world. You can say its "alive" or whatever catch phrase you want, unless its "living" in the enviroment you will apply it in, it is insufficent. If we can't agree on that then we can agree to disagree...


----------



## Dark (Jul 24, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> There are so many assumptions and niave descriptions in this thread, I dont know where to start. First, you simply cannot assume you are right, ever.


 
Just as you should never assume I'm wrong  I personally take everything I'm told with a grain of salt and I fully expect others to do the same to me. Otherwise they are sheep and not men, but thats a personal outlook on life.

[SIZE=-1][/SIZE][SIZE=-1] 

[/SIZE]





			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> This is the mentality difference I was refering to. As an adult I'm not going to fight you unless I think my life or wellbeing is in danger (or that of my wife or family). Your mentality is that of a fighter who fights to win to prove something, be seen, or prove legitimacy.


 
That is the mentality of 90% of the joes you'll face on the street. They will fight you to prove something, and kill you for anything more then that.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> I'm talking about fighting to stop yourself from being killed. I know the limits that apply, thats why I carry my concealed handgun. I know the limits that apply there and what I can and cannot do with lethal force, thats why I make the points I make. Mentally, I'm fighting for my life everytime...I am not responsible for nor will I hesitate to determine the attackers intent. If I feel threatened I will react, big bad wolf or not. We are simply discussing differnt things intent wise. No big deal, we just have to realize that and agree to disagree.


 
I'm going for why they are going at you ad not how. How is easy, in whatever way you won't see it coming but why determines the lengths they will go to.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> First, I'm not a thug, bully, or criminal, so we share no code or rule. I've come a long way in my life from where I started, I'm not going to let anyone take that from me. Its naive to determine or base your action on the supposed "code of conduct" of a criminal. Again though, I'm talking about pure self defense, not measuring up who the best fighter is and taking on only those less skilled than him. I'm not "taking on anyone" I'm going to defend whomever attempts to "take on" me.


 
In my book your not even talking realistically, here is the deal criminal minded individuals have the same basic social codes as everyone else. The difference is they are the judge and jury as whether you've crossed that line and sole executioner of the punishment they think you have earned. You can't take on whomever because in most cases whomever will just shoot you from the shadows and be gone.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> while what you are saying here about spotting people carrying may be true in some cases it is not true across the board and has no set percentage of correctness on which to base your beliefs or actions. I've lived around several gangs both american and russian and I see huge mistakes in your categorization of their body language.


 
True cultural difference and even the way people where raised comes can change the general make up of a person's body language, as does the variency from individual to individual. But the basic hints are all the same.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> While it may hold true in some cases, it is not accurate enough to base your actions on.


 
Its the perfect reason to base my actions on, my thoughts, my gut feelings and picking up on certain body language hints have allowed me to dodge trouble and if needed I'll justify me actions the same way I always do, my actions and my consiquences good or bad its all my fault.



			
				7starmatis said:
			
		

> Actually no these "rookies" have been through extensive training before ever setting foot on the "beat". Oh, and your fantastical notion of "knowing when to break the book" is not condusive to good LEOs.


 
Now in my personal opinion, you are completely off here. A rookie still goes out with the older more experienced officers to learn the ropes and that extensive training isn't worth paper the certificates are printed on. The reason being is because like military training they don't consider the whole of training effective until there is some experience under their belt.

Most cops who are kill in the line of duty are rookies, and they are killed because that training and not experience is what they rely on. Most innocent people shot by cops are shot by rookies, why because the rookies are too "wet behind the ears" to be used to exercising constant control. 

Experience in high stress situations leads to control in high stress situations.



			
				7starmatis said:
			
		

> So can you learn it in training or not? That is the crux of our disagreement. You are contradicting yourself.


 
Training is a start, but it doesn't mean anything without experience. Experiences are realitive to the context of the experience. Experience in a dojo and experience in a bar room brawl is completely different.



			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Your still talking about streetfighting while I'm refering to life or death self defense. So now we agree that training can prepare you for these "worst case scenarios"? I'm confused, you disagreed earlier, and now you agree?


 
Streetfighting is life or death, its about who wins and it doesn't matter how. I asked my old Shotokan instructor to teach me to street fight, he took me to red neck bar and got me drunk then told some guys there I said some stuff and then me told me they said some stuff. And got all caught up in a fight, I woke in the ER.

That was my first lesson, trust no one especially your friends. Thats the kinda life most street fighters come from and unless your training mimics that life style then no it doesn't prepare you for anything. Remember that word "context" what context is your training? Like I said in an earlier post, your art can be "alive" but unless its living in the enviroment you will be applying it then it is insufficent. Insufficent means its lacking, not completely useless...


[





			
				7starmantis said:
			
		

> Just dont ever get comfortable and substitute realism for fantasy...thats the dangerous part. Its hard to keep your training as realistic as possible....try your best.
> 
> 7sm


 
I think we can both agree here


----------



## MJS (Jul 24, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> That was the quote Mike, I'm not saying that the training is worthless. I'm saying you are attempting to compare apples to oranges. If you want to "street fight" you have to train with "street fighters" just like if you want to learn karate you must train with karateka.
> 
> If you are looking at raw self-defense the same applies in context, you could learn with a former LEO who can impart knowledge from experience. In a purely accademic context training in any MA teaches you good skills and effective techniques. In the context of the average joe, this guy has most likely been in a few scarps and knows how to fight. Thats not going to make him Joe Frazier, but he will know how to handle himself.
> 
> ...


 
Hmm...so you're basing everyones effectiveness on if they're training with a streetfighter?  Well, as I've said countless times in the past Ron, unless you've seen how everyone in the world trains, those comments hold no weight.  How would you explain the successfull defenses of people against a real attack?  Sorry, but you can't say that training with a streetfighter(Boy that word is taking a beating) is going to be the ultimate deciding factor.  It all comes down to how one gears their training.  Its amazing how people put punks on such a high pedestal.  There must be alot of Supermen running around those "str33tz" 

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jul 24, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> Streetfighting is life or death, its about who wins and it doesn't matter how. I asked my old Shotokan instructor to teach me to street fight, he took me to red neck bar and got me drunk then told some guys there I said some stuff and then me told me they said some stuff. And got all caught up in a fight, I woke in the ER.


 
Its been a while since I've seen the movie, but didn't that happen to Jean Claude Van Damm in the movie Kickboxer as well?  

Mike


----------



## Dark (Jul 24, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> Hmm...so you're basing everyones effectiveness on if they're training with a streetfighter? Well, as I've said countless times in the past Ron, unless you've seen how everyone in the world trains, those comments hold no weight. How would you explain the successfull defenses of people against a real attack?


 
Don't be there, I've seen much of the world and have seen some really great martial artists. But, experience is the determining factor. In the world of most military and even LEOs there is a certain level of respect given to the combat veterians (I'm not one nor will I claim to be). As soon as the real world where MAs, SD and SF all blur its always the dojo kitties who scream my training teaches me all I need to know. Why is that?



			
				MJS said:
			
		

> Sorry, but you can't say that training with a streetfighter(Boy that word is taking a beating) is going to be the ultimate deciding factor. It all comes down to how one gears their training. Its amazing how people put punks on such a high pedestal. There must be alot of Supermen running around those "str33tz"


 
Same reason as why combat vets get all the props in Military & LEO Circles; they been there and done that. It isn't that there are supermen on streets, its that there are regular men who have toughened up to adverse conditions. It is that while most dojo kittens get to run around using terms like "warrior" and "samurai combat arts" they are all just playing the role of a tiger.

I'm not going to say MAs don't prepare you for a fight, I am going to say they don't prepare you for a life or fighting. Allot of those punks have fought growing up, fought in jail and fought in bars. Thats living in violence, something most people are all to happy to play at and not really experience.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 24, 2006)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> So we get back to the same old argument that it's not a martial art unless it's viable on the street. I have kids to go home to who depend on me. So ... it's unlikely you will find me whooping it up at the local bar anyhow. Y'all have fun, now, y'hear?


 


			
				shesulsa said:
			
		

> And here again, we return to the argument that everyone trains in martial arts primarily for self-defense? While it is a significant reason given, I don't think there are many martial artists who walk the streets thinking, "la-aaa ti da-aahh, I'm so sa-aaafe, no one can hurt me, tum ti la la la-aaaa."
> 
> RBSD doesn't mean you have to seek a fight or brawl to prove something.



These are good points.

Is it possible that the MA training itself give you a better awareness of what&#8217;s around you? Is it possible that the training gives you a much better view of what is going on in the real world so you don't run oblivious into the street singing "I'm alright, don&#8217;t know body worry bout me" while flashing your wallet?

I tend to think that it does. It improves you overall awareness and that in and of itself is a part of real self-defense. The idea is not to fight if at all possible. The idea is not being afraid to run from a fight if at all possible. The idea is being aware of your abilities and not being concerned about ego. If you can run do so, that does not make you less of a martial artist nor does it means you are not capable. It means you are smart.

I do not necessarily feel that in order to prove your MA is real or true or good that you need to go get in a street fight. Nor do I think anyone here is advocating that one should. 

And before the questions accusations and comments start to fly. I have used my MA in real life situations more than I care to remember.

*EDIT* &#8211; APOLOGIES. 

I was reading through the post and I made an error. I am making a comment on the first page of the post when in reality I am 9 pages away.

Once again my apologies for my error and intrusion.

XS


----------



## Dark (Jul 24, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> Its been a while since I've seen the movie, but didn't that happen to Jean Claude Van Damm in the movie Kickboxer as well?
> 
> Mike


 
Thats where he got the idea... I didn't do as good as Van Damn I got sucker punched and went to sleep, luckiely the guy didn't kick me in the face more then a few times while I was out. I quit wanting to learn to street fight after that...


----------



## MJS (Jul 24, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> Don't be there, I've seen much of the world and have seen some really great martial artists. But, experience is the determining factor. In the world of most military and even LEOs there is a certain level of respect given to the combat veterians (I'm not one nor will I claim to be) but as soon as the real world where MAs, SD and SF all blur its always the dojo kitties who scream my training teaches me all I need to know. Why is that?


 
Well, I may not be a combat vet., but I too have had the chance to train with some great Martial Artists.  At least this is one thing that you and I can agree on. 





> Same reason as why combat vets get all the props in Military & LEO Circles they been there and done that. It isn't that there are supermen on streets, its that there are regular men who have toughened up to adverse conditions, is that while most dojo kittens get to run around using terms like "warrior" and "samurai combat arts" they are all just playing the role of a tiger.


 
Ummm..ok




> I'm not going to say MAs don't prepare you for a fight, I am going to say they don't prepare you for a life or fighting. Allot of those punks have fought growing up, fought in jail and fought in bars. Thats living in violence, something most people are all to happy to play at and not really experience.


 
You already have said it...many times.  Personally Ron, I have better things to do in my life than walk around wishing, hoping for, looking for a fight.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jul 24, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> Thats where he got the idea... I didn't do as good as Van Damn I got sucker punched and went to sleep, luckiely the guy didn't kick me in the face more then a few times while I was out. I quit wanting to learn to street fight after that...


 
Well, you didn't expect JCVD to lose did you! The star of a movie, no matter how much he seems to be taking a beating, just keeps on tickin'!!

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jul 24, 2006)

BTW, could you please address this question.



> How would you explain the successfull defenses of people against a real attack?


 
Thanks,

Mike


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 25, 2006)

Finding common ground, Is it safe to say that training and experience go hand an hand, and both need each other? (in terms of self defense)

For instance, we train the best we can, and then do. Upon doing, we experience things that threw us curveballs, that we then  bring back to the "labs" and work on, then repeat the process.

Isn't how the training scenarios came and come about anyway? Formed from real scenarios?


----------



## Kreth (Jul 25, 2006)

Just out of curiosity, how old are the participants in this thread? I'm 39.


----------



## Kensai (Jul 25, 2006)

Dark wrote:


> Don't be there, I've seen much of the world and have seen some really great martial artists. But, experience is the determining factor. *In the world of most military and even LEOs there is a certain level of respect given to the combat veterians (I'm not one nor will I claim to be)*. As soon as the real world where MAs, SD and SF all blur its always the dojo kitties who scream my training teaches me all I need to know. Why is that?



I am, and what I learned in my "training" was more than adequate to see me through, not having been in live combat prior to it, I had no "experience" to go on. How then, does that leave the debate? 

If training was bunk, why would the collective militaries of the world spend millions upon millions of dollars, pounds, euros on training? On simulators, on exercises? Why wouldn't they just take the first conflict that came along and throw in a load of rookies without any or little training? Because they'd be butchered that's why. Experience is an incredible bonus, but it is a luxury. One that I'm not willing to gain through deliberately looking for a fight. Experience and training, neither of which make you invincible. To go looking for trouble to increase your "experience of live situations" is also ridiculous. You go looking for trouble, you will find it. Supposing you don't survive? What a lesson that'd be. No wait... You'd be dead. Supposing you take the beating of your life, what's that teach you? What it's like to be beaten? You can only "experience" so much, given that almost every situation will be completely different from the last. 

Train hard, fight easy. That's the motto of the Royal Navy's training arm. Be diligent, have the greatest awareness on the streets (tm). As my sifu says, "you should have eyes in the back of your head", and then asks us if we feel we've learned something at the end of every lesson. Goes round each one of us, wants to know if there's just ONE thing that we feel we've picked up. AWARENESS, AWARENESS, AWARENESS, Christ I sound like Tony Blair. Anyway, as a wiser man than me said, "to win without fighting is best", that is the true value of MA in my view, the teaching in any decently taught art to be aware of your environment, at least gives you a chance. It served me well a couple of months back. Good debate/discussion though, some valid points made by many.


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 25, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> BTW, could you please address this question.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'd like to read an answer as well.  I noticed no one commented to my intentionally humorous statement that someone had better notify all of those pre-teen girls (and, to add, little old ladies) who have somehow managed to successfully fought off potential abductors and theives that their extensive TMA training (not) was completely ineffectual and congratulate them on their broad and lengthy experience on the str33ts.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 25, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> No but I won't send a point fighter in TKD on to a wrestling mat. Same thing, unless you know the rules of the game, you can't effectively play it. Simply put; you train the way you fight, if you train for the so called "streets" you will be prepared for the "streets." (Provided you aren't being fed a bunch of BS).
> 
> I won't send a point fighter into a muay thai ring or a ballet dancer to the octagon, MA training Vs Street Effectiveness is the same deal.


Suggesting that there are some rules to these encounters and that they should be followed is exactly what takes this discussion away from true self defense fighting and into brawling for reasons other than life or death self defense. In a self defense situation I'm not following any rules or playing any games. I'm going to address the attacker with the fullest intent of removing the threat with what ever means are necessary. 


If we are truly comparing apples to aranges than are you suggesting a street fighter must begin learning to street fight by getting into self defense situations from the beginning? Here is the crux of the matter:


			
				Dark said:
			
		

> I'm not going to say MAs don't prepare you for a fight, I am going to say they don't prepare you for a life or fighting.


 We are not talking about a life of fighting. Self defense is much more than racking up wins on your street belt. Experience only goes so far, as several have allready pointed out here. Each situation is so different and has so many different vriables, "experience" from one situation may not extend to the next. What does lend itself to any situation is training and conditioning your body. Learning to react, move, run, fall, roll, strike, knee, elbow, etc. As ridiculous as training a static disarm technique is to realistic defense against weapons....so is suggesting winning one fight will give you a better chance of winning another. Thats simply not the case. Wins do not help you win other fights, the only thing that lends itself to helping you win fights is your conditioning, both mental and physical. Aside from that its a combination of will, intent, physical condition, and skill. 

Let me address a few points though:


			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Just as you should never assume I'm wrong <img alt="" title="Wink" border="0"> I personally take everything I'm told with a grain of salt and I fully expect others to do the same to me. Otherwise they are sheep and not men, but thats a personal outlook on life.


  I'm sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean assuming your right or wrong in this discussion, I meant on the d3adly str33tz. If you assume your right, you have allready begun the conditions needed to get yourself killed. 



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> That is the mentality of 90% of the joes you'll face on the street. They will fight you to prove something, and kill you for anything more then that.


  Are you saying that 90% of the people I come in contact with on the street will want to fight me to prove something? What I was addressing was my reasons for fighting. If I'm not fighting for any other reason than to save my life or well being, then I dont have to follow any of the rules of conduct, or criminal codes you are so fond of. Because at that point I'm justified in using lethal force, so I could actually shoot them as well. I think your a little off on your statistics of who wants to fight and kill people for nothing. 



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> I'm going for why they are going at you ad not how. How is easy, in whatever way you won't see it coming but why determines the lengths they will go to.


  Why they are attacking me, while interesting on a pyschological level, is really of no consequence in a physical confrontation. To think that you simply will never see it coming is again a misconception of the "d3dly str33tz". If you will never see it coming then you will never be able to defend yourself. So this whole thread is moot. I'm not going to consider the lengths they will go to once the attack is happening. If I'm out with my wife and someone attacks me, I'm going to snatch the life out of them as quick as possible, as soon as they lay their hands on me. What I'm saying is the lengths they will go to really become irrelevent as I'm going to my full lengths regardless. That is of course once physical confrontation has begun. 



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> In my book your not even talking realistically, here is the deal criminal minded individuals have the same basic social codes as everyone else. The difference is they are the judge and jury as whether you've crossed that line and sole executioner of the punishment they think you have earned. You can't take on whomever because in most cases whomever will just shoot you from the shadows and be gone.


  Now these criminal people have the same social codes? You have contradicted yourself in this thread so many times I'm not sure you really know what you have said before. They can't be deadly, insane killing machines who will kill you for nothing then also share the same social codes as everyone else. Now your talking about snipers? You simply can't fight a sniper...this is ridiculous. If your worried about snipers on the street shooting you from the rooftop, you just better stay off the street. No amount of "streetfighting experience" is going to save you from a sniper. The most experienced streetfighter will die like everyone else if someone shoots them from the shadows and is then gone. I'm not even sure anymore what we are talking about....are you?



			
				Dark said:
			
		

> Now in my personal opinion, you are completely off here. A rookie still goes out with the older more experienced officers to learn the ropes and that extensive training isn't worth paper the certificates are printed on. The reason being is because like military training they don't consider the whole of training effective until there is some experience under their belt.
> 
> Most cops who are kill in the line of duty are rookies, and they are killed because that training and not experience is what they rely on. Most innocent people shot by cops are shot by rookies, why because the rookies are too "wet behind the ears" to be used to exercising constant control.


  Do you have any type of source to prove these statements? Some statistics to show "most cops killed in the line of duty are rookies"? And that they are shot because they relied on thier training? Or to show that "most innocent people shot by cops are shot by rookies"?

 Maybe you should research some of your beliefs and see why you believe them. If your worried about snipers killing you on the street, you have no defense. It seems your view of realistic self defense is a bit skewed. 

7sm


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 25, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity, how old are the participants in this thread? I'm 39.



This would be interesting to see answered. I'm 28, will be 29 in October.


----------



## Kreth (Jul 25, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> This would be interesting to see answered. I'm 28, will be 29 in October.


I'm sorry, I forgot to list my str33t creds: I'm an ex-Marine, so I've done my share of fighting in and out of bars, no combat time, though. I've also worked as a bouncer on and off for several years. I've never been shot or stabbed, but I've been hit with beer bottles, pool sticks, barstools, and various other implements you could expect to find in a not so friendly watering hole. Aside from all that, I've been training in the Bujinkan for a little over 14 years, and did couple of months of BJJ. I'm sure I don't qualify as a Bad-*** Street-Fighter&#8482;, but I thought I'd throw it out there for comparison.


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 25, 2006)

I'm 40.  Beaten, broken etcetera by a parent using structural lumber (too young to be smart enough to do anything about it) twice, attempted petty robbery in high school by Las Chicas Verdes at knifepoint in the bathroom, held up at gun point at 18, almost got raped at 19 (security guard I worked with) and physically attacked, restrained and threatened with a knife at 27.

Growing up in So Cal, I learned to avoid most other trouble (such as kidnapping, molestation, gang fights) by using what I know now to be awareness and prevention tactics.  I was the one leaving the bar when things were about to get hairy, holding urine until lunchtime when there were significantly more non-gangsters in the restroom than other times, walking home on major streets against the flow of traffic and memorizing where every single payphone within a one mile radius of home and police station within a 10-mile radius of my home and anyplace else I went regularly were.

:idunno:


----------



## Jenna (Jul 25, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity, how old are the participants in this thread? I'm 39.


See that is the problem right there mister Kreth .. you are not old enough to be commenting on this here thread.. Young gentlemen of your age should be seen and not heard.. Go on now.. run off and play you impertinent whippersnapper..  

Hey I am 24 and 25 next week.. I guess as Shesulsa has said.. my views would not even register here on this toughnut thread.. oh ya want credentials eh? street credentials is it? well we will just see bout that.. but let me just advise you before you say anything to stay out of my badass mofo way.. I have 8 years on PS1.. 5 on PS2 and various unarmed specialties on XBox and PC.

I think that clears up THAT matter and qualifies me to talk with some authority here..

Jenna from the block (say it)


----------



## Kreth (Jul 25, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Hey I am 24 and 25 next week.. I guess as Shesulsa has said.. my views would not even register here on this toughnut thread.. oh ya want credentials eh? street credentials is it?


I think you'll be surprised at some of the answers to my question.


----------



## MJS (Jul 25, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity, how old are the participants in this thread? I'm 39.


 
32.  33 in October.

Never been in the military.  The town in which I reside is quiet for the most part.  Not crime free, but nothing compared to some of the bigger cities here in CT., where shootings are a nightly occurance.  Worked for the DOC for a small period of time.  I had the chance to spend 8 hrs a day with drug dealers, gang members, rapists, people who have been convicted of murder.  The ratio of them to me was obviously pretty high.  Managed to come out in good shape with any conflicts that took place.  I guess I can credit that to the Martial Arts training that I have received from the people whom I've been fortunate to train with. 

Mike


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 25, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, I forgot to list my str33t creds: I'm an ex-Marine, so I've done my share of fighting in and out of bars, no combat time, though. I've also worked as a bouncer on and off for several years. I've never been shot or stabbed, but I've been hit with beer bottles, pool sticks, barstools, and various other implements you could expect to find in a not so friendly watering hole. Aside from all that, I've been training in the Bujinkan for a little over 14 years, and did couple of months of BJJ. I'm sure I don't qualify as a Bad-*** Street-Fighter, but I thought I'd throw it out there for comparison.


 
33 - turning 34 in a few weeks.

I was raised in a very loving house in the middle of a rural neighborhood until I turned 17.  Then I moved to the city to be closer to my job.  One thing led to another and I found myself living in a very bad neighborhood for two and a half years.  During that time I was a bouncer at both a neutral ground biker bar and a strip club.  Also, I was competing in kickboxing and Martial Arts nationally.  Furthermore, I was taken under my instructors wing and trained one on one for 3-4 hours a day minimum as he planned for me to take over his classes, which I did for a while.  These were self defense classes as well as traditional Bando.  I worked with police though I was never the instructor (assistant instructor, yes).  I spared minimum twice a week for several rounds.  At age 20 I began to branch out and study other MA's

As a bouncer I have had several knives pulled on me, a Pagan's(MC club) Old lady tell me that she was going to cut out my heart and keep it in a box, witnessed a double homicide not ten feet away, stared down the barrel of a very cheap gun, been hit with bar stools, pool cues / balls, a large sofa, etc.

To get home I had to either take a cab if I could get one @ 3AM or walk home through Patterson park - the local spot for hookers, pimps, and drug dealers.  That's where I learned to stare back - hard.

When I moved to California I wound up living in San Pedro and in the space of one week had a running gun fight pass by my apartment and a homeless person try to break into my apartment while I was in it.  The gun fight sent me flying to the floor, the homeless guy got his *** handed to him and arrested.  I moved.

These are the closest things to "Str33t Cred" TM  I got, but it has convinced me that the smartest way to survive on the streets is a low profile and a reputation for keeping to yourself unless forced to fight.  Then you go all the way.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jul 25, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> See that is the problem right there mister Kreth .. you are not old enough to be commenting on this here thread.. Young gentlemen of your age should be seen and not heard.. Go on now.. run off and play you impertinent whippersnapper..
> 
> Hey I am 24 and 25 next week.. I guess as Shesulsa has said.. my views would not even register here on this toughnut thread.. oh ya want credentials eh? street credentials is it? well we will just see bout that.. but let me just advise you before you say anything to stay out of my badass mofo way.. I have 8 years on PS1.. 5 on PS2 and various unarmed specialties on XBox and PC.
> 
> ...




I am 39, and this September we will see if I am "and holding" or 40 

Does the old Coleco naval wars count? If not then maybe some of my Lead Miniatures from Fantasy to Futuristic warefare might count?


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 25, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> Does the old Coleco naval wars count?


Rich, we love you, but no one cares about your belly-button.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jul 25, 2006)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> Rich, we love you, but no one cares about your belly-button.




"G",

You sure know how to scare me with that "L" word.  Oh and yeah I spelt wrong, guess I need more help then a spell check for Dyslexia.


----------



## Kensai (Jul 26, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> See that is the problem right there mister Kreth .. you are not old enough to be commenting on this here thread.. Young gentlemen of your age should be seen and not heard.. Go on now.. run off and play you impertinent whippersnapper..
> 
> Hey I am 24 and 25 next week.. I guess as Shesulsa has said.. my views would not even register here on this toughnut thread.. oh ya want credentials eh? street credentials is it? well we will just see bout that.. but let me just advise you before you say anything to stay out of my badass mofo way.. I have 8 years on PS1.. 5 on PS2 and various unarmed specialties on XBox and PC.
> 
> ...



Damn! Sorry Jenna from the block, your enormous experience on not one, but TWO versions of the play station totally outdoes me. I am, in short, simply not worthy to walk in your shadow. :burp: 

Oh, I'm 29, 30 next April. I'm SO looking forward to that...


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 26, 2006)

I'm happy to let my beautiful thread drift into some inane low-mileage discussion regarding who's whacked the most people; whose trunk has seen the most bodybags or whatever, but if I could just take a minute and ask potential readers or posters to relax, find a space where no one's testing how high they can pi$$ up the wall and just take a breath.

Everybody comfortable? Then I'll begin 

See, the original premise of this thread arose from what I feel is a particular inadequacy within SD training in the arts. It's not directed at any particular art let alone any particular _individual's_ training methodology. The issue I have is that in my experience, few [being different from none] martial arts actively train for the *reality* of SD. The reality being different from the theory and practise-hall training by virtue of one simple difference: *the intent*.

Sparring on the mats, your opponent is trying to score points or get a KO, depending upon your art and style. Though it's not generally the case, nor is it best practice, that doesn't preclude the idea that they may actually be trying to put you out of commission altogether, however, you _still_ defend yourself both defensively and offensively to a level **WHICH IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE MATS**. Now, that's a different beast altogether from defending yourself against an attacker intent on serious abuse or mortal damage. And yeah, I know it's a statistical improbability for most, but we're not all gamblers with these things which is why many [granted, not all] do MA in the first instance.

My issue is that there is an assumption that what works in training will *automatically* translate to a defense situation which occurs outside the dojo. I'm not saying there's no relevance in training the way we're training [otherwise I'd not be doing an art at all], but what I'm saying is that this assumption of _automatic_ translation instills in us a sense of complacency that dangerously assures us if we run into trouble we'll automatically be covered, no sweat, no fear, take 'em all on. And that's a worry for me and I try never to send anyone out of the dojo with that belief, in fact I try my utmost to persuade students to the contrary. For me, training's all well and good but it is what it is - dojo theory. My advice for any of my students is not to assume their Aikido will see them through in a mortally dangerous situation, no matter what degree they are, no matter how advanced they are and no matter how many rounds of randori they've had, it doesn't matter - there should be *no* assumptions.

Now I agree with a great deal of what's been presented subsequent to HS resurrecting this thread but for me at least, the central question that I think has been missed is how within our SD practices, do we reconcile a _need_ to train reality **without** actually trying to kill our training partner or potentially getting killed in the act of training for it. Sound silly? Well, as has been eloquently stated already, there's little substitute for experience, but personally it's an experience I've got but am not happy to go seek out, hence the contrived scenario I tried to design at the initial post which is lost in time somewhere now. 

I mean, sit through any training course at work and you're expected, once it's complete, to get out and get your sleeves rolled up. Where I work, I never get training unless it was for a *very* specific application. Nobody would pay for me to train needlessly in an expertise that I wasn't actually gonna use, that's foolish economics and a waste of resources and moreover I'd feel personally it was a waste of my own time.

Again, don't make the mistake of thinking I'm saying MA training has no merit. I mean, people train for all kinds of reasons, SD being just one. But again for the record, training SD techniques in our arts, while an amazing thing in its own right and which can certainly assist us greatly when it's needed for real, does not *automatically* translate from the mats to this godforsaken "streets" place.

I'm not confident that there's any mileage remaining in this thread. I would have been happy to lay it to rest when it came to a natural close some time ago. However, for what it's worth, the question I was _trying_ to raise was how can we train reality situations [where someone has malicious intent] *and* at the same time stay safe? It's an utterly perverse thought that we'd kill ourselves trying to get knowledge that would help us to stay alive. So can it be done? Can a safe, practical, working mirror for reality situations ever be adequately trained? Who's got brains as well as brass knuckles? Bring it on 

Respects!


----------



## Kreth (Jul 26, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I'm happy to let my beautiful thread drift into some inane low-mileage discussion regarding who's whacked the most people; whose trunk has seen the most bodybags or whatever, but if I could just take a minute and ask potential readers or posters to relax, find a space where no one's testing how high they can pi$$ up the wall and just take a breath.


No, that's not it at all. I was just curious about the age and background of the members contributing to this thread, especially those making the most noise.


----------



## Kensai (Jul 26, 2006)

Martial Intent wrote:



> I'm not confident that there's any mileage remaining in this thread. I would have been happy to lay it to rest when it came to a natural close some time ago. However, for what it's worth, the question I was _trying_ to raise was how can we train reality situations [where someone has malicious intent] *and* at the same time stay safe? It's an utterly perverse thought that we'd kill ourselves trying to get knowledge that would help us to stay alive. So can it be done? Can a safe, practical, working mirror for reality situations ever be adequately trained? Who's got brains as well as brass knuckles? Bring it on


 
Well, I have the brass knuckles, but I'm an officially signed up member of DENSA, replete with my joining "chufty" badge. So no brains. It's a fine line to train for realism, and to add juuuust enough "realism" without getting hurt too badly. I've been punched in the face and throat in my training, (more to do with me having the co-ordination of an asthmatic spider than nasty intent) I've carried on, eyes watering, blood and snot out of my nose, an apologetic training partner, perhaps their intent would be worlds apart from someone outside the training environment, but the lesson that I "think" I could/would keep going is... heartning. I punch, they punch, I kick, they kick, I take it damned seriously (matter of "potential" life and death), they take it damned seriously. 

As you said, I'll not going looking for a fight to see if I can use my art or to test it's validity, however, I'd like to think, that "perhaps", I am more prepared than someone who has never done any training, or conditioning, never sparred, doesn't have any sense/level of awareness. I refuse to believe that what I've previously mentioned is invalid because I wasn't taught by a former street fighter, or an ex LEO. Experience is great, but I'll leave the gaining of that to the guys on here that secretly fancy themselves as street fighters, or the next UFC champeen of the world. Their choice, not one for me. I'm too pretty.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 26, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Sparring on the mats, your opponent is trying to score points or get a KO, depending upon your art and style. Though it's not generally the case, nor is it best practice, that doesn't preclude the idea that they may actually be trying to put you out of commission altogether, however, you _still_ defend yourself both defensively and offensively to a level **WHICH IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE MATS**. Now, that's a different beast altogether from defending yourself against an attacker intent on serious abuse or mortal damage. And yeah, I know it's a statistical improbability for most, but we're not all gamblers with these things which is why many [granted, not all] do MA in the first instance.


  While I agree with your point here, I want to add to it a bit. Your speaking of a level appropriate for the mats, but this level can and does change. When I'm fighting one of my younger brothers or sister I'm fighting either below, at, or just above their level. When I'm fighting one of my own training partners or one who is above my own skill, I'm fighting at a much higher level. So this can change depending on who you are fighting. In fact, when you get some training parterns who are as skilled or more skilled than you it changes the game a bit. You can really try alot more with more intent without hurting each other. Sure, the unrealistic part of training is you can't kill each other, but thats always going to exist. However, there isn't a huge difference in experience needed to choke someone out where they tap, and choking them out completely. Stopping an elbow lock before breaking or injuring the joint isn't lacking experience to following through and breaking the joint. See, control is used in every situation. If you do not have control, you aren't skilled in my opinion. Thats why I encourage both the practice of fighting and forms. In forms or drills you learn to follow through with the whole motion and in fighting you learn to set it up correctly. Combined you have a reasonable understanding of how to do both a control and breaking technique. Experience in breaking doesn't neccessarily play into the next scenario as we have seen pointed out here allready. The billions of variations in fighting disallows this experience from playing a major role in more than one fight. The choke that worked well in one instance may just not work well in the next. Period. So the truth is you cannot full prepare with either training or experience....not for every situation. What you can do is train methods and "skills" that transverse all situations, for instance body conditioning, cardio, falling, principles, mentality, etc.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> My issue is that there is an assumption that what works in training will *automatically* translate to a defense situation which occurs outside the dojo. I'm not saying there's no relevance in training the way we're training [otherwise I'd not be doing an art at all], but what I'm saying is that this assumption of _automatic_ translation instills in us a sense of complacency that dangerously assures us if we run into trouble we'll automatically be covered, no sweat, no fear, take 'em all on. And that's a worry for me and I try never to send anyone out of the dojo with that belief, in fact I try my utmost to persuade students to the contrary. For me, training's all well and good but it is what it is - dojo theory. My advice for any of my students is not to assume their Aikido will see them through in a mortally dangerous situation, no matter what degree they are, no matter how advanced they are and no matter how many rounds of randori they've had, it doesn't matter - there should be *no* assumptions.


 I agree, nothing is ever just automatic. I also agree assumptions get you killed. I do however want to make one small point here. When I began my martial arts training I was of the same mind you are...if I was going to assume, I would assume my training was not enough to get me through. Then as I started getting into more fighting and doing some full contact stuff with my Sifu I learned a very important lesson about mentality and the effects of the brain in a self defense situation. Once a situation occurs you have to know you are going to "win" or survive. There can be no doubt. I dont train that I will beat anyone up or win in every situation, but once the fighting starts, there has to be no doubt. Its a mentality thing, you have to be so overwhelmingly violent that you take away their will as well as their ability to threaten you. Even if your fighting someone much much better than you in skill and conditioning, you have to win. Its a survivor thing. So, while teaching people that they shouldn't have a false sense of security or confidence is a good thing, a true self defense situation requires a mentality of a survivor, regardles of situations, injuries, or suroundings.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I mean, sit through any training course at work and you're expected, once it's complete, to get out and get your sleeves rolled up. Where I work, I never get training unless it was for a *very* specific application. Nobody would pay for me to train needlessly in an expertise that I wasn't actually gonna use, that's foolish economics and a waste of resources and moreover I'd feel personally it was a waste of my own time.


 Training for situations you will never use at work and in life are two completely different issues. The amount of loss is much different. When addresing your life, training for something you will never use is an acceptable behavior as the using of it may be worse than the not using it. 

However, the getting out and rolling up your sleves can still be accomplished in "training". Getting with various people to fight, from different backgrounds, training methods and mentalities. While you may not be actually keeping yourself alive, the variables can be there to create a realistic scenario. The adrenaline, the surprises, etc. If I ever run into an attacker that fights me harder, longer, or hurts me more than my training partners and my Sifu, I'm in big trouble. While I can't stick a knife in my shoulder and continue fighting, I can practice the concept of dealing with pain and such. It comes down to mentality once your body is conditioned to a certain point. I've not seen any "thugs" or "insane killing machines" on my 4 mile run route, and I have very few self aclaimed streetfighters last through my fight workout to even get to the actually fighting. I've had a couple and after they throw up 3 or 4 times they try to fight and can barely protect themselves. The "average joe" who has been refered to here so many times, comes out of the gate with 15 seconds of everything they have and then dies directly afterwards. Grant it that 15 seconds is very important, but very few have the skill to even do much damage in that time period. I'm talking about non students here, I open the classes to the public and this is what I see. Alot of talk, very little action. 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I'm not confident that there's any mileage remaining in this thread. I would have been happy to lay it to rest when it came to a natural close some time ago. However, for what it's worth, the question I was _trying_ to raise was how can we train reality situations [where someone has malicious intent] *and* at the same time stay safe? It's an utterly perverse thought that we'd kill ourselves trying to get knowledge that would help us to stay alive. So can it be done? Can a safe, practical, working mirror for reality situations ever be adequately trained? Who's got brains as well as brass knuckles? Bring it on <img alt="" title="Smilie" border="0">


I think it can and is done all the time. Its a matter of keeping an open mind and being honest wiht yourself and your training partners. It will never be the exact same, but then no tow real self defense situation will ever be the exact same either.

7sm


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 26, 2006)

I take exception to your recent post.  It was not at all what you were implying in your first post.  Your first post was about about actively seeking life and death situations to test your skills on the street.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> See, the original premise of this thread arose from what I feel is a particular inadequacy within SD training in the arts. It's not directed at any particular art let alone any particular _individual's_ training methodology. The issue I have is that in my experience, few [being different from none] martial arts actively train for the *reality* of SD. The reality being different from the theory and practise-hall training by virtue of one simple difference: *the intent*.


 
Well all MA's that train self defense are training for intent.  Otherwise, they are not training for self defense at all.



> Sparring on the mats, your opponent is trying to score points or get a KO, depending upon your art and style. Though it's not generally the case, nor is it best practice, that doesn't preclude the idea that they may actually be trying to put you out of commission altogether, however, you _still_ defend yourself both defensively and offensively to a level **WHICH IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE MATS**. Now, that's a different beast altogether from defending yourself against an attacker intent on serious abuse or mortal damage. And yeah, I know it's a statistical improbability for most, but we're not all gamblers with these things which is why many [granted, not all] do MA in the first instance.


 
Right.  This is called sport.  It is not SD.  So the practitioners are not training SD at all.  Therefore, it really has no reason to be included in this thread.



> My issue is that there is an assumption that what works in training will *automatically* translate to a defense situation which occurs outside the dojo. I'm not saying there's no relevance in training the way we're training [otherwise I'd not be doing an art at all], but what I'm saying is that this assumption of _automatic_ translation instills in us a sense of complacency that dangerously assures us if we run into trouble we'll automatically be covered, no sweat, no fear, take 'em all on. And that's a worry for me and I try never to send anyone out of the dojo with that belief, in fact I try my utmost to persuade students to the contrary. For me, training's all well and good but it is what it is - dojo theory. My advice for any of my students is not to assume their Aikido will see them through in a mortally dangerous situation, no matter what degree they are, no matter how advanced they are and no matter how many rounds of randori they've had, it doesn't matter - there should be *no* assumptions.


 
This is true as far as it goes.  but the real issue is schools that lie and say they are training SD instead of admitting the train sport.  As for schools teaching techniques and then "live training".  The effectiveness depends on the effort put into training.



> Now I agree with a great deal of what's been presented subsequent to HS resurrecting this thread but for me at least, the central question that I think has been missed is how within our SD practices, do we reconcile a _need_ to train reality **without** actually trying to kill our training partner or potentially getting killed in the act of training for it. Sound silly? Well, as has been eloquently stated already, there's little substitute for experience, but personally it's an experience I've got but am not happy to go seek out, hence the contrived scenario I tried to design at the initial post which is lost in time somewhere now.


 
Originally, MA's were taught specifically to get their practitioners ready for just such combat.  Just because many have watered down the curriculum doesn't mean that one can not train for real violence in a dojo.  The experience comes from training techniques over and over with live training and sparring.  The old way was just that they stopped short of commiting the deadly strikes and blows.  THAT IS how they trained for combat, and how we can as well.



> I mean, sit through any training course at work and you're expected, once it's complete, to get out and get your sleeves rolled up. Where I work, I never get training unless it was for a *very* specific application. Nobody would pay for me to train needlessly in an expertise that I wasn't actually gonna use, that's foolish economics and a waste of resources and moreover I'd feel personally it was a waste of my own time.


 
Yet SD is training you to AVOID deadly encounters.  So you should be expected to never have to fight again if you've really learned your lessons.



> Again, don't make the mistake of thinking I'm saying MA training has no merit. I mean, people train for all kinds of reasons, SD being just one. But again for the record, training SD techniques in our arts, while an amazing thing in its own right and which can certainly assist us greatly when it's needed for real, does not *automatically* translate from the mats to this godforsaken "streets" place.


 
I agree with this statement completely.  But specifically training on the matts for _*Self Defense*_ does translate to the real thing - if done properly.



> I'm not confident that there's any mileage remaining in this thread. I would have been happy to lay it to rest when it came to a natural close some time ago. However, for what it's worth, the question I was _trying_ to raise was how can we train reality situations [where someone has malicious intent] *and* at the same time stay safe? It's an utterly perverse thought that we'd kill ourselves trying to get knowledge that would help us to stay alive. So can it be done? Can a safe, practical, working mirror for reality situations ever be adequately trained? Who's got brains as well as brass knuckles?


 
As stated above, the entire reasoning behind many martial arts - the reason they actually exist at all - is to answer this very question.  If you find yourself concerned about the effectivness of what you are being taught - go somewhere else.  There are still plenty of schools out there teaching MA for SD.

Peace.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 26, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> So can it be done? Can a safe, practical, working mirror for reality situations ever be adequately trained?


 no


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Jul 26, 2006)

painstain said:
			
		

> reading back on all this i must say i regret replying at all. i was reading it all and going through everyones points (you all have great points) but i started to wonder what would the masters say, or the grand masters. they would say just train.
> 
> so if i could i would withdraw all my posts and say.... just train.
> 
> ...



I have to say out of all the posts in this thread, this is probably the best one.

Jeff


----------



## green meanie (Jul 26, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity, how old are the participants in this thread? I'm 39.


 
A fair question. I'm 37.


----------



## green meanie (Jul 26, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, I forgot to list my str33t creds: I'm an ex-Marine...


 
There's no such thing. Once a Marine, ALWAYS a Marine. :asian:


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 26, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> no



Care to eleborate?


----------



## painstain (Jul 27, 2006)

27 on the fourth


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 27, 2006)

I'm no art afficianado but I know a little and yeah it's a tired and lame old cliche, but I know what I like. I've been round most of the major galleries here in Britain and on the continent and if pushed I reckon I could make a half-decent attempt at spotting a real Van Gogh from a good counterfeit. I'm sure you all know, the real Van Gogh has passion in every stroke; it's reworked agonizingly to inspired perfection; one can almost feel the pain of the man as he deftly moved the oils around the canvas in an impassioned and desperate attempt to *give*; to produce and create a work that is a vehicle to spread a message; to provide and enrich our overall knowledge and appreciation of the subject. That is the *true* art and even if the counterfeit is an admirable copy, that's all it is, that's all it can ever be. There is no intent, there is no motive in it except that the "artist" is on the trail of the denaro. It's flat and there's no desire to give; to create.

[oh, feel free to tune out anytime btw, hehe ]

It's funny though, that kind of artistic discernment between the true artist and the counterfeit doesn't seem quite so difficult here in this thread. In fact, if you ask me, it's a no brainer here to discern the true artists from the frauds and the charlatans. Now take that how you will. Seek anguished offense if you like. Of course, if you have taken offense, well, there's an implication there too I guess . Honestly, you've got me a little apathetic to it at this stage, hehe. 

But one can spot the true artists in this particular type of discussion simply by their modus operandi. The *true* artist, whether they do it consciously or without aforethought, is seeking to create, and by creating, expands the knowledge both in themselves and in others. And it's apparent who here is doing that. And from these true artists [and there are a great many here on MT and yep, got some of you on this here thread also] and from these, I've picked up quite a bit myself and I can only assume others have also in terms of information and in terms of concepts and ideas that in turn spark other ideas. And that all adds to the enrichment of knowledge on this particular concept. Yeah, I'm selfish, you got me there - I doubt I'd have paid my few bucks if I wasn't actually learning anything that I could take away and make use of. 

So I'd just like to take this opportunity to honestly and sincerely thank you, the genuine, honest and true martial artists who have posted here on this thread, not gratuitously to inflate yourself but rather in the honest spirit that true martial artists display all the time. 

If that sounds a bit pretentious; a bit arty-farty; or you just don't understand what I'm talking about, well maybe you just gotta accept the fact then that I ain't talking to *you*. But for you there *is* hope in salvation!  There's hope you'll realize you ain't remotely in that category of either being, or aspiring to a be, a true martial artist, and maybe you'll think a little, heck come back revisit the initial post in this thread, maybe it'll make more sense to you and my intent won't pass you by so easily next time  Until that day, I recommend they set aside a little room for you all here in MT mansions; maybe toss in some street equipment: a few bottles, some blades, handgun, crossbow, shuriken, maglite, whatever, LOL. And you can be at liberty to go there anytime you like with each other and well... do whatever it is you people do, hehe 

Nah, that's all just idle banter. Lighten up  

Respects to all true martial artists!


----------



## Kensai (Jul 27, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I'm no art afficianado but I know a little and yeah it's a tired and lame old cliche, but I know what I like. I've been round most of the major galleries here in Britain and on the continent and if pushed I reckon I could make a half-decent attempt at spotting a real Van Gogh from a good counterfeit. I'm sure you all know, the real Van Gogh has passion in every stroke; it's reworked agonizingly to inspired perfection; one can almost feel the pain of the man as he deftly moved the oils around the canvas in an impassioned and desperate attempt to *give*; to produce and create a work that is a vehicle to spread a message; to provide and enrich our overall knowledge and appreciation of the subject. That is the *true* art and even if the counterfeit is an admirable copy, that's all it is, that's all it can ever be. There is no intent, there is no motive in it except that the "artist" is on the trail of the denaro. It's flat and there's no desire to give; to create.
> 
> [oh, feel free to tune out anytime btw, hehe ]
> 
> ...


 
Lol... Who are we to judge who's a true MA'tist or not. Too many ego's, not enough balance. Still liked your posts though. :asian:


----------



## MJS (Jul 27, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> I'm happy to let my beautiful thread drift into some inane low-mileage discussion regarding who's whacked the most people; whose trunk has seen the most bodybags or whatever, but if I could just take a minute and ask potential readers or posters to relax, find a space where no one's testing how high they can pi$$ up the wall and just take a breath.


 
I had a nice reply all typed out, but lost it all due to a glitch. Here goes again.

I don't think that the thread is too far off course, although some posts have been rather 'interesting'



> See, the original premise of this thread arose from what I feel is a particular inadequacy within SD training in the arts. It's not directed at any particular art let alone any particular _individual's_ training methodology. The issue I have is that in my experience, few [being different from none] martial arts actively train for the *reality* of SD. The reality being different from the theory and practise-hall training by virtue of one simple difference: *the intent*.


 
Yes, there is a big difference, IMO, but some arts may not be seperating the differences. 



> Sparring on the mats, your opponent is trying to score points or get a KO, depending upon your art and style. Though it's not generally the case, nor is it best practice, that doesn't preclude the idea that they may actually be trying to put you out of commission altogether, however, you _still_ defend yourself both defensively and offensively to a level **WHICH IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE MATS**. Now, that's a different beast altogether from defending yourself against an attacker intent on serious abuse or mortal damage. And yeah, I know it's a statistical improbability for most, but we're not all gamblers with these things which is why many [granted, not all] do MA in the first instance.


 
Agreed.



> My issue is that there is an assumption that what works in training will *automatically* translate to a defense situation which occurs outside the dojo. I'm not saying there's no relevance in training the way we're training [otherwise I'd not be doing an art at all], but what I'm saying is that this assumption of _automatic_ translation instills in us a sense of complacency that dangerously assures us if we run into trouble we'll automatically be covered, no sweat, no fear, take 'em all on. And that's a worry for me and I try never to send anyone out of the dojo with that belief, in fact I try my utmost to persuade students to the contrary. For me, training's all well and good but it is what it is - dojo theory. My advice for any of my students is not to assume their Aikido will see them through in a mortally dangerous situation, no matter what degree they are, no matter how advanced they are and no matter how many rounds of randori they've had, it doesn't matter - there should be *no* assumptions.


 
IMO, that all comes down to how one gears their training. Anything has the potential to work, but how are we training it? Is our training partner really trying to hit us or are they stopping their attack just short enough so we really don't even have to move? Are they giving us some pressure on our neck, having their hands wrapped firmly around, or are they giving us a shoulder massage? IMO, we need to push ourselves a bit when we train. 



> Now I agree with a great deal of what's been presented subsequent to HS resurrecting this thread but for me at least, the central question that I think has been missed is how within our SD practices, do we reconcile a _need_ to train reality **without** actually trying to kill our training partner or potentially getting killed in the act of training for it. Sound silly? Well, as has been eloquently stated already, there's little substitute for experience, but personally it's an experience I've got but am not happy to go seek out, hence the contrived scenario I tried to design at the initial post which is lost in time somewhere now.


 
Through scenario drills, we can make our training feel real, while still having that element of safety. Now, I could use a real knife to see if my partern can defend himself, but ultimately, he may only get one shot at it. In the real world thats all he may get, but do I really want to stab my attacker? So, we use markers, no lie blades, etc. to show those 'cuts' and 'slashes' but we're not really killing them, so to speak. We need to put our partner in the proper mindset. If that means yelling, swearing at them, talking bad about a loved one, and getting right in their face, then thats what we need to do. We need to make them feel, mentally and physically, like we want to cause them harm. 



> I mean, sit through any training course at work and you're expected, once it's complete, to get out and get your sleeves rolled up. Where I work, I never get training unless it was for a *very* specific application. Nobody would pay for me to train needlessly in an expertise that I wasn't actually gonna use, that's foolish economics and a waste of resources and moreover I'd feel personally it was a waste of my own time.


 
Those courses provide us with the tools to perform our job. They tell us how to best use those tools, but in the end, it all comes down to how we apply that skill. They're giving us a foundation that we need to build off of.



> Again, don't make the mistake of thinking I'm saying MA training has no merit. I mean, people train for all kinds of reasons, SD being just one. But again for the record, training SD techniques in our arts, while an amazing thing in its own right and which can certainly assist us greatly when it's needed for real, does not *automatically* translate from the mats to this godforsaken "streets" place.


 
Agreed.



> I'm not confident that there's any mileage remaining in this thread. I would have been happy to lay it to rest when it came to a natural close some time ago. However, for what it's worth, the question I was _trying_ to raise was how can we train reality situations [where someone has malicious intent] *and* at the same time stay safe? It's an utterly perverse thought that we'd kill ourselves trying to get knowledge that would help us to stay alive. So can it be done? Can a safe, practical, working mirror for reality situations ever be adequately trained? Who's got brains as well as brass knuckles? Bring it on
> 
> Respects!


 
I think so life can still be found in this thread. 

Thank you for a very thought provoking discussion.:asian: 

Mike


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 27, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Care to eleborate?


 


			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> So can it be done? Can a safe, practical, working mirror for reality situations ever be adequately trained?



No matter what you train whether it be MA or Boot camp, or Law enforcement or anything else you can never be ready for all contingencies and there are unlimited possibilities in a real work situation. You can only be better trained than the man or women that has little or no training. And with that being said let me change my "no" to "maybe" since I see I did not take into account the word "adequately "

But unless the other guy, in a training situation, coming at you is willing to take that extra step to actually try to do you serious bodily injury, no holds bared, you cannot mirror reality and that is certainly not practical and safe.

At best you can train and be better prepared than the next guy. 

Also I had posted previously here, and admittedly at the wrong point in the post, MA training is more than learning how to fight, it is learning how and when not to as well. Ego be damned if I can run away and not hurt someone else or be hurt myself I will. Also I believe that training MA give a person a bit of an edge as to knowing about his or her surroundings and therefore being able to avoid a fight. 



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> It's funny though, that kind of artistic discernment between the true artist and the counterfeit doesn't seem quite so difficult here in this thread. In fact, if you ask me, it's a no brainer here to discern the true artists from the frauds and the charlatans. Now take that how you will. Seek anguished offense if you like. Of course, if you have taken offense, well, there's an implication there too I guess . Honestly, you've got me a little apathetic to it at this stage, hehe.



If this gets me labeled a Charlatan because I do not jump with both feet into the abyss than so be it, I know my training I know my background and I know my experience in these situation and I have no need to prove that to anyone. Nor am I insulted by the inference I have been down this road before and I understand the tactic all to well.


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 27, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> No matter what you train whether it be MA or Boot camp, or Law enforcement or anything else you can never be ready for all contingencies and there are unlimited possibilities in a real work situation. You can only be better trained than the man or women that has little or no training. And with that being said let me change my "no" to "maybe" since I see I did not take into account the word "adequately "


 I agree. Neither training nor "streetfighting" experience can make you ready for all contingencies. So that gap remains forever. We will allways be at a disadvantage to being attacked....and thus why its termed self defense. Your correct again about being better trained, and I'll even add to that in better shape. Conditioning is a huge part of fighting and I've seen guys with skill far beyond their opponent get ripped apart because the opponent was in better shape and was conditioned properly. Train hard, pray you will never use your training, and at the same time expect to use it on everyone....that about right? 



			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> But unless the other guy, in a training situation, coming at you is willing to take that extra step to actually try to do you serious bodily injury, no holds bared, you cannot mirror reality and that is certainly not practical and safe.


 That is done more often than most people want to realize. One thing I want to also say is that too much emphasis is being placed on "intent" in these types of scenarios. My training partner may not have the intent to really kill me, but catching his full power/speed hook to the noggin will still knock me down/out. Whats the difference in that same scenario from some attacker on the street? Does the intent really change the dynamics of the situation? See, my training partern puts in hours a day to make his hook (in this scenario) faster, stronger, more powerful, more precise, and less defensible (thats a word now). I would rather, if I had to choose, take the punch from the guy on the street than him anyday. However I would really just not take either.....what I'm saying is that while intent may differ, training can cover these situations, these "intents" in a relatively safe manner. Can it get you ready to successfully take on any situation and defeat it in 30 seconds flat? Of course not, but it can get you ready to use your body and skill to protect yourself, in any situation. I guess we need to start being realistic in our discussion of "success". Going home alive is success in my book, not pulling off that nice looking combo and knocking the guy out. 



			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> At best you can train and be better prepared than the next guy.


 Completely Agree!!



			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Also I had posted previously here, and admittedly at the wrong point in the post, MA training is more than learning how to fight, it is learning how and when not to as well. Ego be damned if I can run away and not hurt someone else or be hurt myself I will. Also I believe that training MA give a person a bit of an edge as to knowing about his or her surroundings and therefore being able to avoid a fight.


 Again, good post, I always say ego is the numberr one killer off good training (and good kung fu for that matter). 

7sm


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 27, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> Completely Agree!!


 
Yes I believe we do.


----------



## Kreth (Jul 27, 2006)

green meanie said:
			
		

> There's no such thing. Once a Marine, ALWAYS a Marine. :asian:


Admin sep after 3 yrs, 7 months; due to a bad habit of telling people when they were being dumbasses, regardless of what they had on their collar... :lol: Just thought I should clarify, since others have been known to make military claims that are fraudulent.

Back to the topic (sort of): Interesting that some of the biggest mouthpieces on this thread are very quiet suddenly...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 27, 2006)

And I almost forgot

Kreth

I'm greater than 40 less than 50 never in the military per say but I am a Navy brat. 

XS


----------



## Kreth (Jul 27, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> I'm greater than 40 less than 50


:lol:


----------



## Hand Sword (Jul 27, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Admin sep after 3 yrs, 7 months; due to a bad habit of telling people when they were being dumbasses, regardless of what they had on their collar... :lol: Just thought I should clarify, since others have been known to make military claims that are fraudulent.
> 
> Back to the topic (sort of): Interesting that some of the biggest mouthpieces on this thread are very quiet suddenly...


 
First, yep, bad habit indeed. At least you got released. In the past, you would have been hanged or got the firing squad. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Second, I didn't mean to sound annoying and be a big mouthpiece here. Sorry...


----------



## ronin_warrior_j (Jul 27, 2006)

Ive studied alot of martial arts and some are best left in the point sparring/ tournament format because thats what they were built for is sport. I would stack my 15 years of training in 18 different martial arts up against any bar fighter. I would prefer not to fight in such a situation because ive woken up in the drunk tank before in my younger years and its not fun. But if someone takes me to that magical place also know as "melt down" ill gladly push there face in.


----------



## Kreth (Jul 28, 2006)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Second, I didn't mean to sound annoying and be a big mouthpiece here. Sorry...


I think if people note who hasn't posted in this thread since I asked my question about age, and compare that to who was making the most noise about the r34l str33t, they can draw their own conclusions (and it wasn't you, HS)... 
In my experience, the guys who are legit badasses don't make a lot of noise about it. They just do their thing when necessary.


----------



## crushing (Jul 28, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> In my experience, the guys who are legit badasses don't make a lot of noise about it. They just do their thing when necessary.


 

Suddenly, the movie Stir Crazy comes to mind.

"Yea, that's right! That's right! We bad!"


----------



## Kreth (Jul 28, 2006)

crushing said:
			
		

> Suddenly, the movie Stir Crazy comes to mind.
> 
> "Yea, that's right! That's right! We bad!"


Pryor and Wilder at their absolute best! :lol:


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 28, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Pryor and Wilder at their absolute best! :lol:


Totally!!

"You a short sombitch, ain'tcha?"
"Yes, sir, I'm a short sombitch.  My mother was short too.  And my daddy was short and we couldn't even sing."

:lfao:


----------



## Jenna (Jul 28, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Back to the topic (sort of): Interesting that some of the biggest mouthpieces on this thread are very quiet suddenly...


Oh aye mister Kreth.. so its ME youre talking bout? Thats slander that is.. ..or is it libel? :idunno: Ahh but why am I asking you .. you.. you scurrilous scallywag stirring up troubleand shaking the wasp nests here..leave the critters ALONE they are harmless up under the eaves of this old desolate building here.. 

but you have slandered my good name that is unforgiveable.. :whip: 

in Hong Kong.. you would be dead ..

well.. we will see bout that.. bring trouble to the house of the Grandmaster of Pillows would you? Ha! your demise will be hasty my friend and no mistake! Summary justice you shall have.. but it will not be swift.. it will be protracted and painful.. live by the pillow.. die by the pillow.. 


*JENNA NOTE: PLEASE KEEP THE CONVERSATIONS RESPECTFUL.. OTHERWISE I WILL BE ALL OVER ALL YALL LIKE AN UNDIAGNOSABLE RASH!*
*Jenna from the block*


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jul 28, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Oh aye mister Kreth.. so its ME youre talking bout? Thats slander that is.. ..or is it libel? :idunno: Ahh but why am I asking you .. you.. you scurrilous scallywag stirring up troubleand shaking the wasp nests here..leave the critters ALONE they are harmless up under the eaves of this old desolate building here..
> 
> but you have slandered my good name that is unforgiveable.. :whip:
> 
> ...



But I think Jeff aka Kreth would like what you just proposed.   :lol:


----------



## Kreth (Jul 28, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Oh aye mister Kreth.. so its ME youre talking bout? Thats slander that is.. ..or is it libel? :idunno: Ahh but why am I asking you .. you.. you scurrilous scallywag stirring up trouble and shaking the wasp nests here..leave the critters ALONE they are harmless up under the eaves of this old desolate building here..


Me, stir up trouble?  


> but you have slandered my good name that is unforgiveable.. :whip:


Wouldn't that require you to have a good name in the first place? :sadsong:


> in Hong Kong.. you would be dead ..


Bah, the triads fear ninja. :ninja:


> well.. we will see bout that.. bring trouble to the house of the Grandmaster of Pillows would you? Ha! your demise will be hasty my friend and no mistake! Summary justice you shall have.. but it will not be swift.. it will be protracted and painful.. live by the pillow.. die by the pillow..


For some reason this reminds me of the Python sketch about killing a man with a banana.


----------



## Jenna (Jul 28, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Me, stir up trouble?


What.. so it is not true what they say? shut your windows.. close your shutters.. bring in your cattle.. for Jeff "trail of destruction" Velten is heading for town.. your pictures are everywhere.. $10 bounty on your head and a bottle o whiskey (dead or alive).. ha!  



> Wouldn't that require you to have a good name in the first place?


oooh you are a heartless scoundrel to me mister Kreth.. sir here is my gauntlet thrown down on the ground! I shall see you at dawn on the heath! lady chooses weapons 



> Bah, the triads fear ninja.


triads fear ninja? mister Kreth where have you been.. this is the great new millennium.. it is the harbinger of an era of cooperation and commerce.. triads do not fear the ninja.. triads bought out 51% stock in the ninja and now triads wear funny goathoof tabi boots and peddle power rangers lunchboxes and satchels too.. welcome to the new evil! ha! 




> For some reason this reminds me of the Python sketch about killing a man with a banana.


.. hmmm **strokes beard** killing a man with a banana I think mister Kreth you are giving yourself away with several classic Freudian slips here my friend, LOL, ha!  now.. look at this picture.. what does it remind you of.. no not a pink flamingo.. LOL! nah.. I is just messin wid ya mind ..  

uh-oh.. shurikens are drawn.. I am off to hide in my padded cell.. everything be alright there 

Be good now,
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna


----------



## Kreth (Jul 28, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> What.. so it is not true what they say? shut your windows.. close your shutters.. bring in your cattle.. for Jeff "trail of destruction" Velten is heading for town.. your pictures are everywhere.. $10 bounty on your head and a bottle o whiskey (dead or alive).. ha!


Only $10? Didn't Billy the Kid have a bounty of $200? And I'm way more eviler than he ever was. I even um... I killed a 6-pack just to watch it die! :uhyeah:


> oooh you are a heartless scoundrel to me mister Kreth.. sir here is my gauntlet thrown down on the ground! I shall see you at dawn on the heath! lady chooses weapons


No ma'am. If you offer a challenge, then I have choice of weapons. I will choose... the monpa. 


> triads fear ninja? mister Kreth where have you been.. this is the great new millennium.. it is the harbinger of an era of cooperation and commerce.. triads do not fear the ninja.. triads bought out 51% stock in the ninja and now triads wear funny goathoof tabi boots and peddle power rangers lunchboxes and satchels too.. welcome to the new evil! ha!


You have your classic ninja and neo-ninja confused here... :ninja:


> .. hmmm **strokes beard** killing a man with a banana I think mister Kreth you are giving yourself away with several classic Freudian slips here my friend, LOL, ha!  now.. look at this picture.. what does it remind you of.. no not a pink flamingo.. LOL! nah.. I is just messin wid ya mind ..


Speaking of slips, that's the 2nd time you've commented about stroking your beard. Identity crisis, or would you happen to be in the circus? :lol:


> uh-oh.. shurikens are drawn.. I am off to hide in my padded cell.. everything be alright there


Ah, excellent! No one would be suspicious at all of screams coming from a padded cell. MWAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 28, 2006)

Damn I go away or a couple of hours and when I come back it is The Erp Ninjas against the Dalton Triads in Big trouble in Little China Coral.


----------



## Kreth (Jul 28, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Damn I go away or a couple of hours and when I come back it is The Erp Ninjas against the Dalton Triads in Big trouble in Little China Coral.


Which is at least as productive as all the phallus waving that was going on previously.


Oh, and I'm more str33t than you... :uhyeah:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 28, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> Which is at least as productive as all the phallus waving that was going on previously.
> 
> 
> Oh, and I'm more str33t than you... :uhyeah:


 
Very true

And as to the "more str33t than you" comment.

I will save us both time

No you Don't
Yes I do
No You don't 
Yes I do
Repeat 7000 more times

OK maybe you do but my art is better that your art, it is more realistic

No it isn't
Yes it is
Repeat above 5000 times

OK Well nah nah na nah na 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Im done

Honestly, you very likely do.


----------



## Kreth (Jul 28, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> OK Well nah nah na nah na


I have no counter to the lethal nah nah na nah na technique. You win. :lol:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 28, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> I have no counter to the lethal nah nah na nah na technique. You win. :lol:


 
That's good because that was my last weapon


----------



## 7starmantis (Jul 29, 2006)

Heh, as much as I enjoy the entertainment value of the last few pages, lets try and return this thread to its original topic....or let it die a much deserved death.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jul 29, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> I have no counter to the lethal nah nah na nah na technique. You win. :lol:



I had one women teach me an extension to the famous Nah Nah nah na nah nah technique. 

She added Boo Boo to the end of it. 

So Nah Nah nah na nah na nah Boo Boo!

I was like wow she came back from the Nah Nah nah na nah na!

I just shook my head and walked away beaten. 


:lol: :rofl:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 29, 2006)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> or let it die a much deserved death.


 
My vote


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 16, 2008)

Oh LORD!!!! NO I DIDN'T!!! This AGAIN?????

Yep!!

Rather than start a new thread, I remembered this one, and figured the title matched the topic of a short debate on another current thread. Since we were talking of a bar brawl/ street fight the topic of the "guard position" as a viable means of a real life fight defense came up. This isn't meant to attack the poster or his beliefs, but, I thought this would be a good conversation/ debate for both sides.


Stand up Fighter vs. A grappler in a street fight!!! (Another MMA vs. TMA thing--lol & sorry)

You're the grappler, you're down on the ground due to "unfortunate circumstances" and they are on top of you!

Slap the Guard position on or not?

Easier for you to set up and bite your opponent, or for them to do it to you?

Likely to get picked up and slammed down or unlikely?

Hopefully both sides of this will chime in (maybe Mod's can set this up in both forums to get both sides?) If possible---- PLAY BOTH ROLES!!! ( Be HONEST TOO!)


----------



## tshadowchaser (Apr 16, 2008)

> your pictures are everywhere.. $10 bounty on your head and a bottle o whiskey (dead or alive).. ha!


 

Now the $10 will not last and is a small price but maybe to much for him anyways. The whiskey on the other hand makes the bounty almost worth taking. Is that good Irish whiskey or some concoction from England?


----------



## tshadowchaser (Apr 16, 2008)

as to the first post in thread


> What better way to disprove those notions and reaffirm our martial arts as having relevance in today's real world than to take your art out into the street? Bar Brawl Evangelism is the future...
> 
> _</Devil's Advocate>_
> 
> If you got this far, thanks for reading. I'm very interested in your thoughts in particular as to why this would not apply to your art.


 

been in the street with my art not by choice but by circumstance and it held up well. I see no need to test it more as it has already proved it along with my ability where good enough to keep my butt out of the ER


----------



## YoungMan (Apr 16, 2008)

You know, to willingly get into a fight simply to test yourself and see how well you do, when a fight could have been avoided in the first place, is the height of hubris and stupidity.


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 16, 2008)

I brought this thread out again to try and get answers for this question. 






Hand Sword said:


> Oh LORD!!!! NO I DIDN'T!!! This AGAIN?????
> 
> Yep!!
> 
> ...


----------



## newGuy12 (Apr 16, 2008)

Hand Sword said:


> I brought this thread out again to try and get answers for this question.



Seriously?  The grappler vs the stand up fighter?  And it goes to the ground?  If the stand up fighter is on top, he immediately gets back up, right?  To do otherwise would be crazy!

The grappler is the shark in the water!  Stay out of the water!


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 16, 2008)

I was talking about a street fight. Not an MMA fight.  Would the guard position be good to use as I described above?


----------



## newGuy12 (Apr 16, 2008)

Hand Sword said:


> I was talking about a street fight. Not an MMA fight.



Makes no difference -- try to break the mount and get out of there!  Back up, on the feet, that's the optimal thing, in my mind, if it can be done.




Hand Sword said:


> Would the guard position be good to use as I described above?



I also want to hear what people think about this.


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 16, 2008)

I agree, having been in and apart of many scraps. My focus during the brief debate was on the guard position being used during a street fight. How viable is it? Usually, it's the thing to do when on your back, but, detremental during a real fight? Can you control your opponents blows, making yours more effective (as was argued)? Theory says yes! Reality? Not very often from what I've seen. Gravity is on their side, you're on the bottom--GET OUT!!


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 17, 2008)

Hopefully some grapplers will respond to this as well. Everyone should try and play both sides of the argument, and be honest!


----------



## 14 Kempo (Apr 17, 2008)

Well I can imagine I'm going to catch hell for this one, but it is my belief and something that I will always keep in mind ... the person you are in an altercation with, is never alone and therefore to pull guard is not a good thing. While I'm trying to control the person's posture, his buddies are kicking my head in. Now, on the otherhand, if I'm able to instantaneously secure an armbar and snap the elbow and jump up, before the guy on top punches my lights out, or jambs his fingers into my eyes or throat, I'm good. The deal is, there are no rules in a streetfight, there are no winners, there are only survivors and I want to be on the survival side of things. I'm a stand-up fighter and I'll do anything I can to stay on my feet where I'm as mobile as I can be.


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 17, 2008)

I agree, and if reversed and you are in a guard position after you've knocked down or tackled the opponent?


----------



## 14 Kempo (Apr 17, 2008)

Hand Sword said:


> I agree, and if reversed and you are in a guard position after you've knocked down or tackled the opponent?


 
To be quite honest, I don't see myself tackling someone, so that scenario is out. Secondly, if I knock someone down, they better think about staying there, I would not jump on top of them, I would keep my feet under me and scan my surroundings for his friends. As mentioned before, there are no winners, I am there to survive. I have no reason to stand around claiming a win, I have no problem in leaving the area.


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 17, 2008)

I hear you and agree.

Any grapplers care to chime in???? If down, use the guard position? Any ideas about getting bit, slammed, etc..? Is the hold viable for real? EAsier for you to do  the things mentioned to your oipponent? Them to you?


----------



## bluekey88 (Apr 17, 2008)

While I generally feel every technique and tactic can be viable under the CORRECT circumstances...pulling gaurd in a street fight is something very different to pulling gaurd in match.

I point to an example from the Ultimate fighter reality series (two seasons ago I believe).  Two of the guys got into an altercation in the backyard and started fighting on the concrete patio.  One guy tried to pull gaurd, the other guy picked him p and slammed him on his head...'twas nasty.  Lots of blood.  Not like getting slammed on a mat.

This doesn't invalidate the use the gaurd...but it certainly highlights risks that one would not normally see if one only looks at professional fighters ina fairly controlled environment.

Peace,
Erik


----------



## MJS (Apr 17, 2008)

I'll toss my 2 pennies in.   2 people...I don't care how good of a grappler you are, you're going to get stomped.  We saw good examples of this with two fight quest episodes...the Krav Maga and Kajukenbo.  We all saw what happened.  That being said, my first concern would be doing my best to get back to my feet.  

Against 1 person...while grappling is certainly a must IMO, to have inyour toolbox, I tend to think that sometimes alot of people think that it means that its still ok to go to the ground.  Now, going on the situation that was presented, I would say that an offensive guard, rather than a defensive one, would be the way to go.  If you're down, attempt to use your knees as part of your defense.  In other words, keep them between you and your opponent.  Another method would be to kick at your opponent, in an attempt to keep him back.  Are you going to get kicked by him?  Well, anythings a possibility.  

If you do fully apply the guard, don't turn it into a cuddle match.  Why hold him here, doing nothing else?  Paul Vunak brings up some great points in this clip, which was posted on this forum.  Goes right back to my comment on the offensive guard.   I'm sure some will say that the thought of biting someone is gross.  Well, yes it is, but...if its a matter of me getting my rear kicked, or having a chance to survive, gross or not, I'm taking that chance.  

If the situation were reversed, and I was in the guard, same thing.  We see G&P (ground and pound) work with success in the ring, so why not do the same thing in the street?  The groin is wide open for shots, so take advantage of it.  Once its broken, escape.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Apr 17, 2008)

The school's the school.

The ring's the ring.

The street's the street.

Never must these be confused.


----------



## newGuy12 (Apr 17, 2008)

MJS said:


> Once its broken, escape.



Right!  If the opponent is versed in grappling, they will somehow "pass the guard" (or whatever it is called), they will then get some mount that cannot be easily broken, and then things have gone from BAD to OH_NO_THIS_SUCKS!

The non-grappler should try to escape.  Otherwise, their goose is cooked.  It is only a matter of time.  We have seen this, over and over.  Special cases may exist, but the overwhelming body of evidence is that if it goes to the ground, the grappler will get some submission.  This cannot be denied.



Andy Moynihan said:


> The school's the school.
> 
> The ring's the ring.
> 
> ...



Yes, yes.  Here comes the "First Mate" out of nowhere.  He has a broken bottle and he then sticks it into you.  This is no joke.  Get back on the feet as soon as possible.  You must be able to move around.  Too many things can go very bad otherwise.  

If you can stack the opponent(*s*) <-- that's right!  you must consider there are more people coming!  Then knock two of them down, and seek to run to a different position.  This is not the contest in the tournament here, after all.


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 17, 2008)

I think you all are along my way of thinking as well. That's what I was trying to say in the other thread about trying to grapple over ground fight and about the guard position. The claim was made that it was easier for the applier of the guard to bite his opponent than the opponent him. It was also unlikely that he would be picked up and slammed etc... I had contended that if you had to slap a guard on due to unfortunate circumstances on the street, you were asking for trouble.


----------



## MJS (Apr 17, 2008)

Hand Sword said:


> I think you all are along my way of thinking as well. That's what I was trying to say in the other thread about trying to grapple over ground fight and about the guard position. The claim was made that it was easier for the applier of the guard to bite his opponent than the opponent him. It was also unlikely that he would be picked up and slammed etc... I had contended that if you had to slap a guard on due to unfortunate circumstances on the street, you were asking for trouble.


 
I was reading a few posts in that other thread.  The person stated that the person who is in the guard, ie: having it applied to them, would have a hard time applying a bite.  If other words, lets use you and I.  I have you in my guard.  Its easier for me to apply the bite.  Could you bite me?  Anything is possible, but IMHO, the person applying has more control, hense more ease to bite.


----------



## newGuy12 (Apr 17, 2008)

Right.  If someone knows the Judo, they can of course throw the opponent, right?  That's right.  Full power, and you do not assist with the landing, no.  You give that full power throw!  The opponent may not get back up.

You throw him into the wall, into traffic, down the stairs, no one cares.

The grappler, he can perhaps get the good hold, the opponent may pass out.  Or, he may dislocate something or break something.  Okay, real fast motion -- that guy is no threat now.

But, for the TKD guy or Karate Person to go about trying to do this? ??? This is insane, its asking for trouble.

Paul Vunak or some RBSD or some grappler can do this. As for me, I'm trying HARD to get that freaking guy off of me!!!  Make him go away, at least to freaking kicking range, and I am out of there!  None of this wrestling if I can have anything to do about it!


----------



## newGuy12 (Apr 17, 2008)

From that video that was posted earlier, remember, Paul Vunak will go for the bite to the face in a N.Y. minute.  He was teaching -- you do not hesitate -- you bite the face hard.

If they opponent persists with the hold, and reverses it, okay, you go ahead and bite!  

Once the opponent's mind is confused, and loses focus somehow becuase of this, though -- I say, make the move, get that sucker off of you!

That's why I wish I knew enough grapping to understand how to escape the hold.  I would not seek to know enough to win the contest, only enough to have a good chance of breaking some hold, that is all I need -- to escape!

Then, you can kick and punch!


----------



## Hand Sword (Apr 17, 2008)

MJS said:


> I was reading a few posts in that other thread. The person stated that the person who is in the guard, ie: having it applied to them, would have a hard time applying a bite. If other words, lets use you and I. I have you in my guard. Its easier for me to apply the bite. Could you bite me? Anything is possible, but IMHO, the person applying has more control, hense more ease to bite.


 
As with him and through my many experiences, I have to disagree. In a real fight, if you have to "guard" your opponent, you're on the ground. You got there by getting tackled, or dropped with a shot. They've landed on top of you. You're probably not with it mentally, at least completely, and the guard is a desperation measure, where you clamp them to you. Same with MMA fights on tv. Theory wise---this and that can be done etc.. and true, it can. However, application from what I see--those punches get landed, picked up and slammed, and if clamping to ease the pressure, and they can't move--they'll bite you. Remember the bite will occur out of desperation on their part. That will be because they are clamped or pinned down somehow. The appler won't think to bite off the bat, that will be your opponents choice first. Your trying to cover somehow to avoid further damage usually.


----------



## MJS (Apr 21, 2008)

Hand Sword said:


> As with him and through my many experiences, I have to disagree. In a real fight, if you have to "guard" your opponent, you're on the ground. You got there by getting tackled, or dropped with a shot. They've landed on top of you. You're probably not with it mentally, at least completely, and the guard is a desperation measure, where you clamp them to you. Same with MMA fights on tv. Theory wise---this and that can be done etc.. and true, it can. However, application from what I see--those punches get landed, picked up and slammed, and if clamping to ease the pressure, and they can't move--they'll bite you. Remember the bite will occur out of desperation on their part. That will be because they are clamped or pinned down somehow. The appler won't think to bite off the bat, that will be your opponents choice first. Your trying to cover somehow to avoid further damage usually.


 
Looking back at one of my earlier posts, I stated that clinching up with the person in the guard would not be my first pick. Actually wrapping your legs around them into full guard was my last option, but if it was the last resort, I suggested to turn it into an offensive guard rather than defensive. 

I really don't think that anything is sure shot. Look at regular sparring. How many times do we still take shots even though we're blocking? We take alot of shots, so I'm kind of confused on your line of thinking when you said punches still get in from the guard. 

Additionally, the guard shouldn't be static. While the guard looks like the person applying is in the worse position, its really the other way around. I disagree when you said they'll bite first. Remember, I said that the guard, IMO, if used on the street, should be offensive, therefore, offensive movements will be first on my mind.

While the question was the closed guard, when it comes down to it, one shouldn't have to be limited to just that guard method.  There are a number of other things that can be done from that position, so why not use them?


----------

