# Can an underweight man realistically protect himself/fight his way out of a situation?



## drewtoby (Nov 27, 2013)

I keep coming back to this question. I'm 6 foot and weigh in at a scale-tipping 140lbs (I run) :mst:, and have been training in hapkido the past several years. I know hapkido is designed to not be dependent on strength, but being so light gives me a lot smaller margin of error with my locks/throws/ect. Also, it makes several throws/locks not viable in a real life scenario.

Then we come to the striking issue: if I am unable to throw or lock my opponent for whatever reason, my strikes have significantly less force than that of a larger person. While it comes down to vital targets, I would take a wrecking ball over a hammer. Oh, and I don't have muscle/fat to help protect me.

The only two things I have going for me are endurance and determination. That and the element of surprise, 2 fold (the side of me most don't know exist, and hapkido). Which, surprise is crucial for hapkido, as most don't expect someone to be able to do some of the things we do.

But, back to the main question: is it realistic for someone like me to be able to protect himself/fight his way out of any surprise situations? Especially against a larger opponent? (multiple opponents are subject to debate for heavier people, so I'll leave this one out for now) 

(By fight I mean being cornered, and having no choice but to take the guy(s) down)


----------



## skribs (Nov 27, 2013)

Couldn't find the fight on Youtube, but there is a 400-pound difference here and the bigger guy gets TKO'd.  I'm not as small as you (5'6, 165) but I'm not the strongest or fastest, and I am having trouble with hapkido sparring.  They say I need to snap more, wrestle less, but it's a steep learning curve for me right now, so I know what you mean.  I have small hands, too, which makes getting the proper grip a bit more difficult.

I think in a real fight, small guys like us have to pick our targets.  Eyes, nose, groin, and neck are all prime targets that we should be able to hit fairly hard.


----------



## David43515 (Nov 28, 2013)

As long as you 1) focus on the real goal (getting out of the bad situation and getting home safe), and 2) don't try to forget your short-comings and fight the other guy's fight you should be okay. 
Obviously you need to be more aware of range and footwork because you can't expect to stand toe-to-toe with a big guy and trade punches, but none of use should be doing that anyway. Work with your strengthes and try to improve some of your weaknesses a bit at a time...just like everyone else.


----------



## DennisBreene (Nov 28, 2013)

While I'm not small 5'9" 195, I have cardiomyopathy and don't have the stamina I used to, and it has caused me to reassess how I would approach personal defense against someone stronger. I really enjoy working with someone bigger and stronger because it forces me to be precise with techniques to be effective. There is always someone stronger.  You have to make your art your own and hone the skills you can use effectively even when it requires that you modify the technique.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 28, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> I keep coming back to this question. I'm 6 foot and weigh in at a scale-tipping 140lbs (I run) :mst:, and have been training in hapkido the past several years. I know hapkido is designed to not be dependent on strength, but being so light gives me a lot smaller margin of error with my locks/throws/ect. Also, it makes several throws/locks not viable in a real life scenario.
> 
> Then we come to the striking issue: if I am unable to throw or lock my opponent for whatever reason, my strikes have significantly less force than that of a larger person. While it comes down to vital targets, I would take a wrecking ball over a hammer. Oh, and I don't have muscle/fat to help protect me.
> 
> ...



From a Bjj/Judo perspective, yes you can. I don't know how Hapkido does things, but in my art (Bjj) I see it all the time. Royce Gracie dominated larger opponents throughout the first and second UFC.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Nov 28, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> I keep coming back to this question. I'm 6 foot and weigh in at a scale-tipping 140lbs (I run) :mst:, and have been training in hapkido the past several years. I know hapkido is designed to not be dependent on strength, but being so light gives me a lot smaller margin of error with my locks/throws/ect. Also, it makes several throws/locks not viable in a real life scenario.
> 
> Then we come to the striking issue: if I am unable to throw or lock my opponent for whatever reason, my strikes have significantly less force than that of a larger person. While it comes down to vital targets, I would take a wrecking ball over a hammer. Oh, and I don't have muscle/fat to help protect me.
> 
> ...


To be blunt, this is more about you not knowing what you are doing. Quit worrying about your weight and get to work on the training floor.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 28, 2013)

Both of these guys hit pretty hard, and I am betting could knock down larger opponents, and they are far from heavy weights


----------



## sopraisso (Nov 28, 2013)

Xue Sheng said:


> Both of these guys hit pretty hard, and I am betting could knock down larger opponents, and they are far from heavy weights



^To the op.
And they could also hit their opponent's eyes, throat or groin quite easily and wouldn't even think about it, it seems. ;-)
Never forget self defense fighting is not like sparring of any sort. The goal is not to win, but not to lose (you may be cornered but as long as you create an opening to escape and you use it, you probably "won"); there are no forbidden techniques (specially for your opponent aggressor); there is no guarantee it will be a 1x1 fight; there's no rule or referee to prevent you from using a pen, a brick, a chair or whatever improvised weapon if you need, and surely there won't be anyone to prevent your aggressor from using weapons as well; and no matter how it ends, it is always a bad experience. But if you watch your back carefully you can probably pretty much avoid every possibility of going through that terrible experience in your life. A good practitioner trains to be ready to use the art, but a better practitioner also makes sure he/she will never need to use it. You may possibly know everything I'm saying here, but just in case... ;-)

Enviado de meu GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk


----------



## drewtoby (Nov 28, 2013)

Touch Of Death said:


> To be blunt, this is more about you not knowing what you are doing. Quit worrying about your weight and get to work on the training floor.



Partly true. I transferred dojangs and am now neither master of new or old. I'm feeling lost sometimes in the new material.


----------



## Balrog (Nov 29, 2013)

If I may....

Keep in mind some basic concepts:

1.  If they can't see you....
2.  If they can't touch you...
3.  If they can't breathe....
4.  If they can't stand up....

....they can't hurt you.

Concentrate on training to where you can make one or more of those things true.  Your size doesn't matter.  A 12 year old girl might be attacked by a 250 pound male.  But she can generate enough power to blow out one of his knees (making #4 true) and escape.  If she can do it, so can you.


----------



## TaiChiTJ (Dec 18, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> Partly true. I transferred dojangs and am now neither master of new or old. I'm feeling lost sometimes in the new material.



Honesty. Always a good first step on the road to sorting things out! Hang in there and good luck.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Dec 18, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> Partly true. I transferred dojangs and am now neither master of new or old. I'm feeling lost sometimes in the new material.



So you were a master of the previous techniques you learned?  Use them in a fight if you must.

I am curious as I don't understand what you mean by needing more "snap."  Could you explain that?  As to Hapkido, at least the Hapkido I learned, speed and accuracy are needed.  A certain amount of strength is needed, but mostly you are working against muscles that are weak themselves.  You don't therefore, need the strength of a body builder.  You should be working against weaker muscles on joints, using techniques.  

We had a throw at a very basic level that required slipping out of a grip to a wrist and grabbing the opponents wrist, pulling the opponent off balance, and pulling him over your shoulder.  It helped the technique that we used our free arm under the crotch to lift the opponent.  Used forcefully, that arm will make the opponent want to jump over your shoulder.

Much of Hapkido works that way.  We had a break where we moved under the opponent's grabbing arm, around behind the opponent and putting him in an arm lock, then pulling the head back to a painful position.  What made it work was the use of a pressure point on the opponent's elbow.  We never try to get into a contest of who is stronger.  But for sure, who is faster and more accurate.  Are you being taught things like that? 

You are not going to be a TKD striker or kicker, but you should be close so that your strikes and kicks are effective.  Are you being taught how to strike and kick with power and Gi, or just told to hit and kick?

You should be taught many techniques so on those (rare) occasions where size might make one technique less effective, another will make differences in size of no importance.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 19, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> I keep coming back to this question.


I hate to be Daisy Downer, but you worry too much.  "Under weight" is a very flexible term and should be judged in context of the situation.  Further, it is only one variable in a vast pantheon of variables, ruling the odds in any encounter.  140 lb might be "under weight" when compared to a 250 lb C.O. but it might be a different thing entirely when stacked against a 98 lb kid.  Other variables include length of bones, and endurance.

And even the modern pseudo-medical definition of "under weight" has way too many assumptions built in.  "Ideal weight" is an overly simplified "idealism" of what the mean weight should be among a give population.  It doesn't do a good job of taking human body types into account such as endomorph, or ectomorph, nor does it take into account body-mass ratio or strength-to-weight ratio.




Stop worrying so much.  Train smart and often.  Eat a good diet.  Pretty much end of story there.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## MJS (Dec 19, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> I keep coming back to this question. I'm 6 foot and weigh in at a scale-tipping 140lbs (I run) :mst:, and have been training in hapkido the past several years. I know hapkido is designed to not be dependent on strength, but being so light gives me a lot smaller margin of error with my locks/throws/ect. Also, it makes several throws/locks not viable in a real life scenario.
> 
> Then we come to the striking issue: if I am unable to throw or lock my opponent for whatever reason, my strikes have significantly less force than that of a larger person. While it comes down to vital targets, I would take a wrecking ball over a hammer. Oh, and I don't have muscle/fat to help protect me.
> 
> ...



Size and strength do play a part, but IMO, not as big of a part as some like to say.  But to answer your question...yes, a smaller person could be capable of defending themselves.


----------



## Gnarlie (Dec 19, 2013)

OP: Do you believe that it's possible for a woman to defend / fight her way out of a situation? 

Gnarlie


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 19, 2013)

When my wife was a cop she would take big guys down often.  She's 5'4. 120 pounds.  So yeah its not the size of the dog in the fight it's the size of the fight in the dog.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 19, 2013)

All the platitudes aside, the truth is that size does matter. It's certainly not the *only* factor, but it matters.

Two people, roughly the same degree of training, skill and physical abilities. One is 5'7, 120lbs, the other is 6'4", 250lbs.

Which one do you prefer to get hit by?

Obviously, the smaller. 

That being said, a self-defense situation is rarely about who can hit harder. It's about mindset. It's about speed. It's about taking advantage of opportunities. 

Mindset:
Are you willing to win? By that I mean, are you willing to do whatever is required to end the conflict in whatever manner is the safest for you? Sometimes that can mean putting your opponent on the ground and subduing them till they calm down, or until help arrives. Sometimes it can mean causing them a significant injury. Sometimes it can mean crippling them. Sometimes it can mean killing them.
While we all (I assume) hope that none of the latter cases ever applies, they're possible. And there are people who are absolutely psychologically incapable of killing, crippling, or maiming. These people are at a distinct disadvantage in the survival game, but it's important to honestly evaluate what you are and are not willing to do to another human being, and train accordingly. It wouldn't do you any good to learn the Dim Mak Death Touch if you simply couldn't bring yourself to use it.

Speed: 
When I first started training I was a little guy. Even after I grew, I still spent a fair bit of time sparring with people who were considerably larger than me. I am pretty sure that some of them could have hit me so hard my kids would have gotten bruises. But big means more mass. Which means they're going to be a little slower and not be able to change direction as quickly. And of course, there is a very good reason body builders make rotten marathon runners.
The biggest advantage a small person has vs a larger one is speed. Learn to use it not just for striking, but evading. 

Opportunities:
Can you distract them? Can you attract attention from others who might help? Did your attacker slip, giving you the chance to push him down/sweep his legs/whatever, dropping him to the ground and allowing you to escape? Keep in mind that the goal of most self-defense scenarios is to escape with minimal or no injuries. That doesn't necessarily mean beating them down. Keep the real goal in mind and don't get stuck fighting when it's no longer necessary.

How hard you can hit only really matters if you're going toe to toe exchanging blows. And that's just about the last thing you want to do.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Dec 19, 2013)

Dirty Dog said:


> All the platitudes aside, the truth is that size does matter. It's certainly not the *only* factor, but it matters.
> 
> Two people, roughly the same degree of training, skill and physical abilities. One is 5'7, 120lbs, the other is 6'4", 250lbs.
> 
> ...


Well, you just start singing that Aerosmith song, "Chip Away At The Stone" and then you physically explain the joke.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 19, 2013)

Dirty Dog said:


> All the platitudes aside, the truth is that size does matter. It's certainly not the *only* factor, but it matters.
> 
> Two people, roughly the same degree of training, skill and physical abilities. One is 5'7, 120lbs, the other is 6'4", 250lbs.
> 
> Which one do you prefer to get hit by?


You've heard the old saying, right?

"The bigger they are, the harder they hit!"  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 19, 2013)

For the record my taiji shifu is half my size and over 20 years older than I am and can throw me around like a ragdoll, knock me to the floor, joint lock me and move me all over the place....and he does it all while looking way to relaxed to be doing it all....that in an of itself can make you nervous


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 19, 2013)

Aren't we taking about MA. What has weight and size got to do with it? For that matter, strength, speed, age etc.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 26, 2013)

Xue Sheng said:


> For the record my taiji shifu is half my size and over 20 years older than I am and can throw me around like a ragdoll, knock me to the floor, joint lock me and move me all over the place....and he does it all while looking way to relaxed to be doing it all....that in an of itself can make you nervous



Sounds like you, like so many others got too much respect or fear for your trainer. If your trainer fought a twice his size  street criminal, with a killer instinct, then your trainer would lose big time.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 26, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Sounds like you, like so many others got too much respect or fear for your trainer. If your trainer fought a twice his size  street criminal, with a killer instinct, then your trainer would lose big time.



Sounds like you...don't know me very well


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 26, 2013)

After years of teaching and training Japanese to win competitions. One can say we look for specific body types in specific arts. We also look for that "killer instinct" and channel it. However students do grow up. I have seen police riot team members as big as myself wipe the floor with others and smaller guys do the same. So size has little to do with it. As for age a visiting kyudan in his 70s early 80s wipes the floor with everyone, the older the better. Speed factor plays little in the outcome. Its all about timing. M.A is not about strength but fitness and techniques are.

The youngest fittest, strongest stand little chance. Just like swatting a mosquito. I spend years on the opposite side to anything up to 55 of them seven day


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

Time for reality check.

If you have two persons with identical technical and mental skills, then the biggest guy will win.

Hence the reason why all combat sports got weightclasses...


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

Hyoho said:


> As for age a visiting kyudan in his 70s early 80s wipes the floor with everyone, the older the better.



People belived that stuff in the 80ies. How about that kyudan entering UFC ? 

Didnt think so...


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 27, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Time for reality check.
> 
> If you have two persons with identical technical and mental skills, then the biggest guy will win.
> 
> Hence the reason why all combat sports got weightclasses...



You forgot identical age.


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 27, 2013)

Of course not UFC dont have such ages but senior guys seem to make mincemeat of younger inexperience ones. As said there are rules in UFC but maybe they wouldn't stick to them. But the same can by said for other arts. This is 2013. Buy a gun! If someone breaks into my house I'm not going to shout out, "Hey I taught budo in Japan for 40 years" I'll shoot him in a way that he won't tell tales.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

Well the "sensei respect" is probably worthy a discussion of its own. But my impression is that noone will beat their sensei in sparring because they think they cant or because they are afraid of some wicked revenge like a hit in the troat. Just imagine if theres a visiting master to the club and a yellow belt street guy beats the crap out of him ? The senseis are building an aura that they are unbeatable and knows secret technics unknown to the lower ranked that they will use if necessary. Like "You will learn so and so at 2. dan"


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> But, back to the main question: is it realistic for someone like me to be able to protect himself/fight his way out of any surprise situations? Especially against a larger opponent? (multiple opponents are subject to debate for heavier people, so I'll leave this one out for now)
> 
> (By fight I mean being cornered, and having no choice but to take the guy(s) down)



Realistically, no.

People who decide to train MA are nice middle class people who dont want to fight.

Mean Street people dont bother with MA as they instictively knows it does not work. A street person would train weights and kickboxing,MMA or just depend on his fighting spirit personality.

So we got a nice little middle class guy versus a big mean criminal...


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 27, 2013)

Kofo said:


> We "sensei respect" is probably worthy a discussion of its own. But my impression is that noone will beat their sensei in sparring because they think they cant or because they are afraid of some wicked revenge like a hit in the troat. Just imagine if theres a visiting master to the club and a yellow belt street guy beats the crap out of him ? The senseis are building an aura that they are unbeatable and knows secret technics unknown to the lower ranked that they will use if necessary. Like "You will learn so and so at 2. dan"



No aura about it. You have your job because you 'can' stand on the teachers side and take on the best of 55 students every day. They learn from losing and hopefully become good enough to win national championships. Add to that the fact that they got there in the first place because many of them won scholarships to be in the dojo.

Practice twice a day Monday to Friday, all day weekends. A Show an is a rank beginer. A sensei has no business disillusioning a lower grade that he can handle himself in such circumstances.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 27, 2013)

Ooh, you look like you're going to be fun...



Kofo said:


> Sounds like you, like so many others got too much respect or fear for your trainer. If your trainer fought a twice his size  street criminal, with a killer instinct, then your trainer would lose big time.



And... this is substantiated by...?



Kofo said:


> Time for reality check.



Really. 



Kofo said:


> If you have two persons with identical technical and mental skills, then the biggest guy will win.



Again, substantiated by....?



Kofo said:


> Hence the reason why all combat sports got weightclasses...



Er... actually, no. The weightclass thing is nothing to do with the bigger guy winning, it's to create more even consistently even matches. I know you're going to think that's the same thing, but it's really not. 



Kofo said:


> People belived that stuff in the 80ies. How about that kyudan entering UFC ?
> 
> Didnt think so...



Hmm, if the Kyudan is from an art that I think Hyoho is talking about, I'd probably back them in the UFC.... provided they're actually allowed to use their art, of course. What's the typical UFC competitor's muto dori like? And I'm not quite sure what a sporting contest has to do with the OP asking about being able to defend himself... very different environments and skill sets, after all... 



Kofo said:


> Well the "sensei respect" is probably worthy a discussion of its own. But my impression is that noone will beat their sensei in sparring because they think they cant or because they are afraid of some wicked revenge like a hit in the troat. Just imagine if theres a visiting master to the club and a yellow belt street guy beats the crap out of him ? The senseis are building an aura that they are unbeatable and knows secret technics unknown to the lower ranked that they will use if necessary. Like "You will learn so and so at 2. dan"



There's the question... where is your impression from? I've done sparring with my instructor and beaten them (not often, and not without then receiving fair recompense...), and I encourage my students to look to ways to beat me when we get into free-form training... of course, the distinction isn't whether or not the instructor can be beaten (occasionally), it's the consistency in the way they win. A lucky shot or technique can really be just that.

Of course, there are other secrets, but I can't tell you about them until you're at least 3rd Dan...



Kofo said:


> Realistically, no.



You don't have anywhere near enough information to make that call... no-one on the thread does, not even the OP.



Kofo said:


> People who decide to train MA are nice middle class people who dont want to fight.



HA! You seriously believe that? Really? People who don't want to fight, those who aren't interested in fighting, they're the ones seeking out instruction in combative technique and technology? Really? I suppose the Army is only made up of people who don't like guns as well... 

Look, some people who train martial arts do so due to some "Karate Kid" idea of "so I won't have to fight".... but to say that that's the sole, or even dominant demographic is just plain ignorant of reality. And that's without even getting into the different appeal of different martial arts.... 



Kofo said:


> Mean Street people dont bother with MA as they instictively knows it does not work. A street person would train weights and kickboxing,MMA or just depend on his fighting spirit personality.



"Mean Street people"? And they don't bother with martial arts, so they train in... martial arts? Kickboxing and MMA? Oh, and for the record, weight training is, in a real way, one of the most dominant self defence practices out there... it's an attempt to apply a tactic of dissuasion via appearance ("I'm big and scary, please don't attack me"). Again, not all, of course, but it's certainly a major reason (unconsciously, at least).

The reality is that a "bar-room brawler" is more likely to "train" by drinking beer (adding weight behind their actions), physically, verbally, and psychologically dominating, and launching a sudden (often single), unexpected, and blindsiding attack.... most often a basic, but reliable and experienced one. Of course, you'd need to clarify first if you're talking about social, or asocial violence... is it a resource predator (more likely to train by carrying a weapon, not even necessarily knowing how to use it other than to threaten), is it a social status seeker (fuelled by adrenaline and alcohol, not training, but more likely to be a more athletic person than other types), or what?

Your profile states that you train in "real self defence". What do you mean by that? Your posts here don't indicate much reality, honestly, nor any real understanding of actual self defence methodology, violence, or anything outside of MMA/UFC imagery....



Kofo said:


> So we got a nice little middle class guy versus a big mean criminal...



Both of whom seem to only exist in your mind.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> Ooh, you look like you're going to be fun...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, well

Its my opinion that mindset is the most important in self-defence. Not complicated technics, foot position etc. 

Its common sense that the biggest guys win when skill set is identical.

Why would anyone do traditional MA if he wanted to fight ? The logical thing would be to start boxing, kickb or MMA. The majority of people who start with traditional MA want to learn self defense. They do not wanna do realistic full contact sparring, if so they would of course join boxing or MMA.

Why doesnt criminals train traditional Martial Arts if it really works magic in a street fight ?

Muscle is of course a major part of self defense, only a professional fighter would stand a chance in a fight against a 2 meter tall Strong man competitor, your average club black belt wouldnt stand a chance. The level of a black belt is not relatively any better than a recreational tennisplayer compared to Rafael Nadal.

MA would probably work wonders towards a traditional drunk. I actually belive that.

However MA got no chance when the oponent is a seasoned, traumatized, ruthless criminal, used to a hard life in and out of prison. Just the look of his muscular body, tatoos and psycotic eyes would make 99% of black belts freeze.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 27, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Why doesnt criminals train traditional Martial Arts if it really works magic in a street fight ?



do they learn MMA



Kofo said:


> However MA got no chance when the oponent is a seasoned, traumatized, ruthless criminal, used to a hard life in and out of prison. Just the look of his muscular body, tatoos and psycotic eyes would make 99% of black belts freeze.



You have statistics of experience to back this claim up or is this just your opinion, have you seen and trained at all TMA schools and styles, do you train MMA to fight and do you fight in an MMA ring....Otherwise you have an interesting little fantasy world going on here....

Personally I am rather impresses with the practioners of MMA and I am also of the belief that there are more in MMA, sanshou and boxing that can handle a fight outside of the ring than those that train TMA. However I also know that there are those that train TCMA that can defend themselves rather well if need be. 

But you also have to understand that you are looking at two different views of fighting when you talk TMA and MMA. MMA generally trains to compete in a ring against an opponent they will likely see again either in the ring or outside of it. TMA is training to fight only if necessary and hopes to never see the other guy again.

As for you comment 



> Why would anyone do traditional MA if he wanted to fight ? The logical thing would be to start boxing, kickb or MMA. The majority of people who start with traditional MA want to learn self defense. T*hey do not wanna do realistic full contact sparring, if so they would of course join boxing or MMA.*



You obviously never trained Xingyiquan or Baguazhang  where I trained Xingyiquan and Baguazhang or Wing Chun were I trained it. And you obviously did not start training when I did, we hit pretty hard way back then

Now before this can move forward you really need to answer my above questions which are



Do you have statistics of experience to back this claim up or is this just your opinion?
Have you seen and trained at all TMA schools and styles?
Do you train MMA to fight and do you fight in an MMA ring?.

And I will also ask



Do you train Boxing, or Kick Boxing, or Muay Thaior any other art you feel is usable in a fight
If you did train some style you think is traditional, what was that style or styles and how much time did you train it or them individually?


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 27, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Well, well
> 
> Its my opinion that mindset is the most important in self-defence. Not complicated technics, foot position etc.
> 
> ...



There are actually some elements of truth here mixed in with a big old pile of overgeneralizations and misapprehensions.  Lets see if we can unpack some of that.

*Truths:*
Size and strength make a difference in a fight, especially an unarmed fight.
Mindset makes a difference in a fight. (This includes but is not limited to: mental toughness, willingness to inflict harm, awareness, ability to control fear, and much more.)
Experience in real fights makes a difference.
With all the above in mind, it's not inaccurate to say that a martial artist who is a casual hobbyist, who is not particularly large or athletic or a natural fighter, and who trains in a school with limited contact and intensity may be at a disadvantage in a fight with a untrained street thug who is bigger, stronger, tougher, more aggressive, and who has been in more fights.
Many martial artists with black belts do fall into this "casual hobbyist" category.

*Corrections:*
Boxing, kickboxing, and MMA* are *martial arts. (You can make the argument that MMA is actually an approach to training that incorporates several traditional arts rather than being a singular art in itself.  Either way, the point stands.)
Boxing, kickboxing, and MMA *are not *the only arts which incorporate full-contact sparring. Not by a long shot.
Some criminals* do *train martial arts (besides boxing/kickboxing/MMA).  Most don't train anything, relying on other elements such as superior weaponry, numbers, or surprise to come out on top.  Martial arts require hard work and dedication, which are not the hallmarks of your typical street thug. (You are correct that martial arts are not magic.  If they were a magical easy short-cut to automatic victory, then street punks and everybody else would be training.)

*Summary:*
There are a lot of elements that go into winning or losing a fight.* Strength, athleticism, determination, technical skill, weaponry, tactical considerations, and so on.  The more of a deficit you have in one area, the more you have to make up in others. Saying that one of these elements is all-determinative is just as incorrect as saying that it is irrelevant.  Good martial arts training can help build some or all of these elements and thereby increase your odds of success.  This depends heavily on how you conduct your training and there is no magic about it - just hard work.

*(As Chris and others have pointed out, "self-defense" does not mean the same as "fighting.")


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 27, 2013)

@kofo

Some of us have done both sports oriented arts and traditional for many years.It's difficult to keep both going without one leeching into the other. But it does help us differentiate the pros and cons of each.

When it comes to fighting spirit, resolution to deal with a situation etc. Either is OK. As I already mentioned "fighters" with a hungry disposition are chosen for gendai (modern)teams and individuals to win national championships. 

I never ever took up what I do to defend myself. On the contrary I did get in a bit of trouble when young and initially used budo to let off steam.

MA is self discipline and lots of repetition to ingrain system into natural ability. Not usually a criminal mindset. Then again a lot of MA utilizes tools as weapons. So if you think that some nice defensive guy won't pick up a pool cue or bottle if threatened you would be wrong. Getting back to the original topic...its about winning, whatever the circumstances. Regardless of weight, age, size whatever. If you are threatened, you take the guy out with whatever it takes.

Do you really think that 99% of "black belts" as you call them would freeze? I suggest you come to Japan for a while for some special training. You better bring some pampers and get good insurance. My school kids were Sandan after with eight years of daily training. And that's for starters


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

Hyoho said:


> Do you really think that 99% of "black belts" as you call them would freeze? I suggest you come to Japan for a while for some special training. You better bring some pampers and get good insurance. My school kids were Sandan after with eight years of daily training. And that's for starters



It depends of course on the blackbelt and the attacker, in every culture you got someone that looks like the ultimate public enemy. In Japan maybe a Yakuza ? So if a regular Japanese office worker, blackbelt, is facing a Yakuza you tell me who should freeze of the two ?


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> *Corrections:*
> Boxing, kickboxing, and MMA* are *martial arts. (You can make the argument that MMA is actually an approach to training that incorporates several traditional arts rather than being a singular art in itself.  Either way, the point stands.)
> Boxing, kickboxing, and MMA *are not *the only arts which incorporate full-contact sparring. Not by a long shot.
> Some criminals* do *train martial arts (besides boxing/kickboxing/MMA).  Most don't train anything, relying on other elements such as superior weaponry, numbers, or surprise to come out on top.  Martial arts require hard work and dedication, which are not the hallmarks of your typical street thug. (You are correct that martial arts are not magic.  If they were a magical easy short-cut to automatic victory, then street punks and everybody else would be training.)



For me it is natural to separate Traditional Martial Arts from Boxing, Kickboxing and MMA because the difference is simply to big. Whenever you see a guy with a Karate or TKD background enter UFC or K1 you cant see any sign of their roots, its like they have to totally abandon their traditional style to stand a chance.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 27, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> *Summary:*
> There are a lot of elements that go into winning or losing a fight.* Strength, athleticism, determination, technical skill, weaponry, tactical considerations, and so on.  The more of a deficit you have in one area, the more you have to make up in others. Saying that one of these elements is all-determinative is just as incorrect as saying that it is irrelevant.  Good martial arts training can help build some or all of these elements and thereby increase your odds of success.  This depends heavily on how you conduct your training and there is no magic about it - just hard work.
> 
> *(As Chris and others have pointed out, "self-defense" does not mean the same as "fighting.")



I respect your opinion, but I feel that mindset is the most important. You see athletes choke under pressure in all sports, baseball, soccer, tennis etc They have all the training and so on, but still end up freezing at the most important time.

So when it comes to your regular guy blackbelt in a life and death situation, Im sorry, I just dont see him turning in to Jean Claude van Damme kicking the bad guys ***.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Dec 27, 2013)

The old guys are more skilled and more deliberate. They know their life is on the line; so, any gap given is death to the less skilled wanna be champion. Watch the lions on the discovery channel. They lion with the pride fights much harder than the one trying to take over the operation.
Sean


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 27, 2013)

Kofo said:


> For me it is natural to separate Traditional Martial Arts from Boxing, Kickboxing and MMA because the difference is simply to big. Whenever you see a guy with a Karate or TKD background enter UFC or K1 you cant see any sign of their roots, its like they have to totally abandon their traditional style to stand a chance.



If you can't see Lyoto Machida's karate background when he fights, then frankly you don't know what you are looking at. Likewise, a lot of K1 fighters are karateka.  If you think they've abandoned their arts, then you don't know what their art is really about in the first place.

You say "the difference is too big" between boxing/kickboxing/MMA and other martial arts.  Leaving aside the fact that kickboxing is a generic term that covers a variety of arts/competition formats and that MMA is a training/competition format that encompasses a number of unrelated traditional arts, what is it that you think makes such a huge difference? What experience or training do you have in any of these arts to back up that opinion?



			
				Kofo said:
			
		

> I respect your opinion, but I feel that mindset is the most important. You see athletes choke under pressure in all sports, baseball, soccer, tennis etc They have all the training and so on, but still end up freezing at the most important time.
> 
> So when it comes to your regular guy blackbelt in a life and death situation, Im sorry, I just dont see him turning in to Jean Claude van Damme kicking the bad guys ***.



Many people would agree with you on the idea of mindset being the most important element.  It's pointless to argue about that because there's no way to measure it. If you have two combatants, equal in all regards except that one has a tougher mindset and the other has an extra 40 pounds of muscle, who will win?  Based on just that information, you can't know.  There's no way to say "this guy has an extra 10 points of killer instinct and each point is equal to a 5 pound weight advantage."

The real problem comes with your "so when it comes ..." conclusion.  On what basis do you purport to know that the "regular guy blackbelt" will have the inferior mindset in a life or death situation compared to whoever they might be fighting? For that matter, how are you defining the "regular guy blackbelt?" There can be a huge difference in the mindset cultivated/required in one school versus another.  

BTW - in order to win or survive a fight, it's not necessary for a martial artist to "turn into Jean Claude van Damme", i.e. put on a cinematic display of magical ***-kicking.  It's just necessary to be a little tougher or smarter or luckier than the opponent.


----------



## colemcm (Dec 27, 2013)

Kofo,

You seem to be operating under the misapprehension that a TMAist is going to fight like they're performing a form. That's not how it works and that's not what forms are for. Forms are the start, not the end.

You also seem to believe that anyone involved in TMA is basically a delusional dreamer who operates with no understanding of the reality of violence. At the same time, you believe that guys who train for a one-on-one competition that offers little possibility of death in a caged ring with a padded floor are the pinnacle of what a MAist is and what the MAs are about. I have a lot of respect for MMA fighters. I think the UFC did the MAs a great service in highlighting the weaknesses in many of the training regimens of that time. However, it's a mistake to believe that TMAs haven't changed or incorporated those lessons.

I'd recommend that you take that critical eye that you put on TMA and take a good long look at MMA. There's a BIG difference between a guy that gets into a fight where the consequence is that he loses a competition and maybe his ego is bruised (but he still takes away a good-sized purse) and a guy that gets into a fight where the consequence is he dies and doesn't go home to his family.

Are many of the people that get involved in TMAs dedicated to really learning self-defense? Not really. Maybe 1 in 100 will put in the time and energy needed to really learn how to defend themselves. Is that the fault of TMAs? No. It's the fault of the individual.

TMAs aren't what you see in a Jet Li movie. Real fights aren't what you see in a cage match.


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 27, 2013)

Kofo said:


> It depends of course on the blackbelt and the attacker, in every culture you got someone that looks like the ultimate public enemy. In Japan
> maybe a Yakuza ? So if a regular Japanese office worker, blackbelt, is facing a Yakuza you tell me who should freeze of the two ?


Not a difficult question to answer. I used to work for the Yakuza. There are those that wear nice suits and carry brief cases and (chimpira) that do displeasing work for them that have done time. Even Yakuza kids go to school. The had a very nice private Kendo Dojo and like their kids to be raised in a proper very very polite manner. I found when it came to duty and obligation they top the list.


----------



## yakuzanobi (Dec 27, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> But, back to the main question: is it realistic for someone like me to be able to protect himself/fight his way out of any surprise situations? Especially against a larger opponent? (multiple opponents are subject to debate for heavier people, so I'll leave this one out for now)
> 
> (By fight I mean being cornered, and having no choice but to take the guy(s) down)



To answer your question, YES. If you don't have the power you'd like to have you would have to have a firm understanding of anatomy and pressure point areas as you don't have time for multiple strikes to take down an opponent. Big guys go down just as easy when attacked in the eyes, throat, or groin area. So if you feel your power isn't there yet, focus on delivering more accurate strikes. Size means nothing, when I visit Japan 130-165lb Japanese men strike me at 200lbs and i go down like it's cool. 

When I studied Kobudo, I was taught a punching technique that involved a whipping motion before the strike that made it much more powerful than it should have been. Point being, there are ways of dealing with a lack of power. Also, you may want to incorporate eccentric weight training in your workout. Along with plyometrics, it will increase your strength and power but not muscle mass.

Respectfully Submitted


----------



## Kofo (Dec 28, 2013)

yakuzanobi said:


> To answer your question, YES. If you don't have the power you'd like to have you would have to have a firm understanding of anatomy and pressure point areas as you don't have time for multiple strikes to take down an opponent. Big guys go down just as easy when attacked in the eyes, throat, or groin area. So if you feel your power isn't there yet, focus on delivering more accurate strikes. Size means nothing, when I visit Japan 130-165lb Japanese men strike me at 200lbs and i go down like it's cool.
> 
> When I studied Kobudo, I was taught a punching technique that involved a whipping motion before the strike that made it much more powerful than it should have been. Point being, there are ways of dealing with a lack of power. Also, you may want to incorporate eccentric weight training in your workout. Along with plyometrics, it will increase your strength and power but not muscle mass.
> 
> Respectfully Submitted



Why would a untrained, overweight, unskilled nice guy attack anyone ?

If  you face a big mean bastard, those magic pressure points and whipping  strikes will do no harm at all. The attacker could be so full of  adrenalin, anger and drugs that he wont feel any pain.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 28, 2013)

colemcm said:


> Kofo,
> 
> You seem to be operating under the misapprehension that a TMAist is going to fight like they're performing a form. That's not how it works and that's not what forms are for. Forms are the start, not the end.
> 
> ...



I agree to a lot of what is said, however MA magic is alive and kicking also in this tread.


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 28, 2013)

Kofo said:


> I agree to a lot of what is said, however MA magic is alive also in this tread.


True but its going in circles with "What if" questions. Its 2013 even bad people are usually armed regardless of size. Leave your budo in the dojo and go by yourself a taser.

I live in the recent typhoon disaster area but have had to relocate due to damage and no services. Living in the jungle with guys carrying bolo looking for something to steal by moonlight for two weeks needs stronger defence other than MA.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 29, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Well, well
> 
> Its my opinion that mindset is the most important in self-defence. Not complicated technics, foot position etc.



Okay, no. The most important is education, followed by awareness. The idea of "mindset" being important is kinda, well, wrong the way most look at it. For one thing, there is a tendency to imagine self defence being an almost "kill or be killed" situation... which can happen, but is so far in the minority to be almost irrelevant... and the typically associated "killer" mindset is firstly not achievable for many, and secondly not really that appropriate. Having a mindset of "I will survive/I will get through this" is okay, but it's only part of the equation. If you really want to have something reliable as physical defensive methods, you're going to need to work some form of technique. But, to clarify for you, that does not mean anything complicated. 



Kofo said:


> Its common sense that the biggest guys win when skill set is identical.



Who says that skill sets are identical when it comes to a self defence scenario? 



Kofo said:


> Why would anyone do traditional MA if he wanted to fight ? The logical thing would be to start boxing, kickb or MMA. The majority of people who start with traditional MA want to learn self defense. They do not wanna do realistic full contact sparring, if so they would of course join boxing or MMA.



And your evidence for this is....?



Kofo said:


> Why doesnt criminals train traditional Martial Arts if it really works magic in a street fight ?



Once again, you don't seem to be aware of the realities of who is doing what.



Kofo said:


> Muscle is of course a major part of self defense, only a professional fighter would stand a chance in a fight against a 2 meter tall Strong man competitor, your average club black belt wouldnt stand a chance. The level of a black belt is not relatively any better than a recreational tennisplayer compared to Rafael Nadal.



Wow. You know, the way you spout such non-sense, it'd be nice if you could actually cite, I don't know, any evidence at all....



Kofo said:


> MA would probably work wonders towards a traditional drunk. I actually belive that.



Then you should really change your beliefs, as they seem to be made up of nothing based in reality.



Kofo said:


> However MA got no chance when the oponent is a seasoned, traumatized, ruthless criminal, used to a hard life in and out of prison. Just the look of his muscular body, tatoos and psycotic eyes would make 99% of black belts freeze.



Ah... cause, of course, that's what everyone faces every day.... and, again, where do you get your ideas about "99% of black belts" from?



Kofo said:


> It depends of course on the blackbelt and the attacker, in every culture you got someone that looks like the ultimate public enemy. In Japan maybe a Yakuza ? So if a regular Japanese office worker, blackbelt, is facing a Yakuza you tell me who should freeze of the two ?



Ha! And, exactly how much experience do you have with yakuza? Hyoho has some... you?



Kofo said:


> I respect your opinion, but I feel that mindset is the most important. You see athletes choke under pressure in all sports, baseball, soccer, tennis etc They have all the training and so on, but still end up freezing at the most important time.
> 
> So when it comes to your regular guy blackbelt in a life and death situation, Im sorry, I just dont see him turning in to Jean Claude van Damme kicking the bad guys ***.



So, what you're saying is that you have an unrealistic image of what a martial artist should be like (JCVD), an unrealistic understanding of martial arts, an unrealistic understanding of modern violence and self defence, and are unaware of the reality on any side, but have your beliefs which you think are therefore something valid for us to listen to? Okay.... 

Oh, and the connection to an athlete "choking" isn't actually related or relevant here either... quite a different phenomena, so you know.



Kofo said:


> Why would a untrained, overweight, unskilled nice guy attack anyone ?



Where did that come from? And why do you think that your description is accurate in any way? But, for the record, I can think of quite a few scenarios where it could easily happen...



Kofo said:


> If  you face a big mean bastard, those magic pressure points and whipping  strikes will do no harm at all. The attacker could be so full of  adrenalin, anger and drugs that he wont feel any pain.



Not really sure about kyusho, are you? They don't have to feel pain for these things to be effective....



Kofo said:


> I agree to a lot of what is said, however MA magic is alive and kicking also in this tread.



Yep... and a lot of it seems to be coming from you. 

You know what, I was right. I said you'd be fun....


----------



## Kofo (Dec 29, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> Wow. You know, the way you spout such non-sense, it'd be nice if you could actually cite, I don't know, any evidence at all....



Please explain why a regular black belt would have a higher skill level than a regular tennis, football or hockey player ?


----------



## Kofo (Dec 29, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> Then you should really change your beliefs, as they seem to be made up of nothing based in reality.



Funny coming from a guy beliving in magic pressure points, too bad magic doesnt work in the UFC i guess.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 29, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> Who says that skill sets are identical when it comes to a self defence scenario?



No one of course.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 29, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> Where did that come from? And why do you think that your description is accurate in any way? But, for the record, I can think of quite a few scenarios where it could easily happen...



Its hard to debate when you miss points all the time.

small vs big
skilled small vs big
skilled small vs skilled big

Are the different scenarios here


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Please explain why a regular black belt would have a higher skill level than a regular tennis, football or hockey player ?



First of all, you'd need to define "regular black belt"... because I'm really not sure there is such a thing. But, if we're to look at it as someone who has spent their time, dedicated to their own art, to the point of being seen as above the general populace (not too far off, I'd suggest), then you'd need to compare them more with the local tennis or golf pro. Sure, they might not win Wimbledon, but they've developed the skills to be able to make a career of it... and, put them up against someone who plays at the club as a casual player, who are you going to bet on? Of course, this is completely irrelevant, you realise... hence my calling it nonsense.



Kofo said:


> Funny coming from a guy beliving in magic pressure points, too bad magic doesnt work in the UFC i guess.



Ooh, I love it when you show just how little you get this.... "magic pressure points"? Really? Who (apart from yourself) have said anything about "magic pressure points"? I mentioned Kyusho... you do know what that is, don't you?

And, as for it not "working" in the UFC (the UFC is nothing to do with real violence and self defence, you know... which means that if something doesn't work in there, all it means is it doesn't work there), well...






Lots of examples of it working there, mate... 



Kofo said:


> No one of course.



Then why do you use it as a justification of your lack of knowledge of the reality here?



Kofo said:


> Its hard to debate when you miss points all the time.



Ha, you think this is a debate? Nah... you're not informed enough. This is a walkover.



Kofo said:


> small vs big
> skilled small vs big
> skilled small vs skilled big
> 
> Are the different scenarios here



No they aren't. Smaller against larger attacker in a self defence situation/environment is the scenario. What you're positing is removed from that.


----------



## SENC-33 (Dec 30, 2013)

Kyusho was my first passion and for somebody to suggest it isn't effective on big mean bastards high on drugs and adrenaline is foolish. I don't do many seminars anymore but when I do them for LEO's I "always" get asked about the effectiveness of pressure points. This is when I pull out the vagus nerve strike which is doable for pretty much anybody in a pre-emptive situation. It works wonders on insane people as well......

There are several easy targets along the jaw line and neck. You don't need years of Kyusho training to incorporate them into your striking regiment


----------



## Kofo (Dec 30, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> Ooh, I love it when you show just how little you get this.... "magic pressure points"? Really? Who (apart from yourself) have said anything about "magic pressure points"? I mentioned Kyusho... you do know what that is, don't you?
> 
> And, as for it not "working" in the UFC (the UFC is nothing to do with real violence and self defence, you know... which means that if something doesn't work in there, all it means is it doesn't work there), well...
> 
> ...



Nope thats just regular knock outs nothing like this stuff you belive in






Sorry I dont belive in this stuff. And neither does Guy Bloom, having withstanded these tricks,commented to the "instructor" on why he didnt go down. "It just didnt hurt enough"


----------



## Kofo (Dec 30, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> Ha, you think this is a debate? Nah... you're not informed enough. This is a walkover.



Any reason you are so full of yourself ? What are you compensating for ? Lack of height ? Childhood bullying ?

You just seem like a very insecure person in all your answers here on martialtalk. Like you really has to put the other person down. You are the only person acting like this towards me. The others might not have agreed with everything but they say where they feel I am right and offer their opinion where they disagree.


----------



## SENC-33 (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Nope thats just regular knock outs nothing like this stuff you belive in
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I guess if it doesn't bring Guy Bloom to his knees it won't work on John Doe?


----------



## Kofo (Dec 30, 2013)

SENC-33 said:


> I guess if it doesn't bring Guy Bloom to his knees it won't work on John Doe?



My enemy is not John Doe, he is not dangerous. I prepare for a strong, druged, psycho killer. That stuff wont stop him.


----------



## SENC-33 (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> My enemy is not John Doe, he is not dangerous. I prepare for a strong, druged, psycho killer. That stuff wont stop him.



Partner I have been practicing Kyusho for over 20 years and YES it will stop even a drug induced nut case in his tracks (when executed properly). The problem with YouTube is that you get to cherry pick what you choose to look at, link to and comment on. I could do the same thing with any style of martial art or self defense and then just proclaim it to be nonsense that doesn't work. If only these video creators would stop with the showcasing and stick to the aspects that are effective.....That goes for any style or art.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Well, well
> 
> Its my opinion that mindset is the most important in self-defence. Not complicated technics, foot position etc.
> 
> ...


Wow...

While I generally agree that size, strength, weight, endurance, and "attitude" *can be* very important factors, particularly when one or both are unarmed, pretty much the rest of your post is pure MMA "Meat Head" ramblings.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 30, 2013)

lklawson said:


> Wow...
> 
> While I generally agree that size, strength, weight, endurance, and "attitude" *can be* very important factors, particularly when one or both are unarmed, pretty much the rest of your post is pure MMA "Meat Head" ramblings.



Kirk, I suspect that Kofo doesn't actually train MMA or anything else. Most of the MMA fighters I train with are much better informed.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Funny coming from a guy beliving in magic pressure points, too bad magic doesnt work in the UFC i guess.


That's mildly amusing coming from a guy endorsing boxing because, brace yourself Effie, boxing used to teach several "pressure point" attacks!  Even post-Marquis of Queensberry there were a number of them which were common.  1913 Middle-Weight Champion of the World, Frank Klaus describes several in his book, "The Art of In-Fighting."

 The "button," the "Mark" (solar plexus), and the "Liver Punch" are all ones which you should still know of.  There were others, but they're pretty much forgotten or illegal now.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Kirk, I suspect that Kofo doesn't actually train MMA or anything else. Most of the MMA fighters I train with are much better informed.


I agree generally.  He might "train" but I seriously doubt that he Trains, which is why I described him as a MMA "Meat Head."  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> My enemy is not John Doe, he is not dangerous. I prepare for a strong, druged, psycho killer.


So you train with firearms.

Why didn't you say so.

Mods move him to the guns sub-forum.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 30, 2013)

Folks, let's leave off the the personal attacks, OK?  I'm seeing some very interesting discussion in this thread -- but it's starting to get lost in some personality clashes.  Try to remember that text communication like posts ends up losing a lot of the non-verbal indicators that we rely on to smooth face-to-face interaction.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 30, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Kirk, I suspect that Kofo doesn't actually train MMA or anything else. Most of the MMA fighters I train with are much better informed.



Much why I asked the questions I did, that remain unanswered, in post #34


----------



## James Kovacich (Dec 30, 2013)

Haha, a certain poster here reminds of this lady I took a night school class with. She was telling people she was a kickboxer and was introduced to me as a kickboxer that I should train with...turned out she attended cardio kickboxing classes... 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 30, 2013)

Well I tried to give reasonable answers to Kofo. I think pehaps he should fill in his profile with a bit more detail so we know who we are respondiing to. Going easy on begginers is one thing. Trolls are another matter. Oh well, I'm on the net and don't respond well to trolls or keyboard MA. My last post in this one.

I did join this Forum many years ago but had to re register. It used to be a bit cleaner then.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

James Kovacich said:


> Haha, a certain poster here reminds of this lady I took a night school class with. She was telling people she was a kickboxer and was introduced to me as a kickboxer that I should train with...turned out she attended cardio kickboxing classes...


I remember seeing the Tae-Bo commercials with some woman talking to the camera about how much safer she feels now that she can defend herself thanks to Tae-Bo!  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Kofo (Dec 30, 2013)

James Kovacich said:


> Haha, a certain poster here reminds of this lady I took a night school class with. She was telling people she was a kickboxer and was introduced to me as a kickboxer that I should train with...turned out she attended cardio kickboxing classes...
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2



Probably more useful than kihon and kata. In cardio kickboxing they hit on pads dont they ? Not just on imaginary foes in the emty air.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 30, 2013)

lklawson said:


> So you train with firearms.
> 
> Why didn't you say so.
> 
> Mods move him to the guns sub-forum.



So what kind of person do you train to defend against ?

Regular guys dont attack anybody, _unless_ something have triggered an insane, psycotic anger.

I hope none of you guys never gets attacked by a "real" killer criminal. He will see right threw you, he will see in your eyes that you are not a violent man. And _whatever_ you do, DO NOT, get into some stupid martial arts fighting position, you will just fuel his anger.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Probably more useful than kihon and kata. In cardio kickboxing they hit on pads dont they ? Not just on imaginary foes in the emty air.


Not the ones I've seen, no. What I've seen has all been empty air with badly formed punches and horrible technique for what passes for kicks.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> So what kind of person do you train to defend against ?


 I don't make a whole lot of assumptions about what the person is or is not because it's difficult to know ahead of time. However, if I were to, I would do a statistical analysis on what attacks were in the areas and base it off of a profile model.



> Regular guys dont attack anybody, _unless_ something have triggered an insane, psycotic anger.
> 
> I hope none of you guys never gets attacked by a "real" killer criminal. He will see right threw you, he will see in your eyes that you are not a violent man. And _whatever_ you do, DO NOT, get into some stupid martial arts fighting position, you will just fuel his anger.


How cute! You assume that no one here has ever been in an actual confrontation!

This is the point where you start hedging your bets and developing a mystical hyper uber caveman vampire monster criminal murder death- machine so that you can say " see, you never actually face a REAL criminal!!!"


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> So what kind of person do you train to defend against ?
> 
> Regular guys dont attack anybody, _unless_ something have triggered an insane, psycotic anger.
> 
> I hope none of you guys never gets attacked by a "real" killer criminal. He will see right threw you, he will see in your eyes that you are not a violent man. And _whatever_ you do, DO NOT, get into some stupid martial arts fighting position, you will just fuel his anger.



:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You don't actually have a clue what you're talking about do you?

I think conflicts involving Freddy Krueger are not nearly as common in the real world as they apparently are in your fantasy world.


----------



## seasoned (Dec 30, 2013)

jks9199 said:


> Folks, let's leave off the the personal attacks, OK?  I'm seeing some very interesting discussion in this thread -- but it's starting to get lost in some personality clashes.  Try to remember that text communication like posts ends up losing a lot of the non-verbal indicators that we rely on to smooth face-to-face interaction.



As a reminder, this was placed a few posts back.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> So what kind of person do you train to defend against ?
> 
> Regular guys dont attack anybody, _unless_ something have triggered an insane, psycotic anger.
> 
> I hope none of you guys never gets attacked by a "real" killer criminal. He will see right threw you, he will see in your eyes that you are not a violent man. And _whatever_ you do, DO NOT, get into some stupid martial arts fighting position, you will just fuel his anger.



Like I said...you don't know me very well.... ever deal with a bleeding heroin addict coming at you....or a mental health patient....or a pro-wrestler....after you have then maybe we will have something to talk about... and I'm nothing compared to some on this site.

Do you actually train anything?


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 30, 2013)

drewtoby said:


> Then we come to the striking issue: if I am unable to throw or lock my opponent for whatever reason, my strikes have significantly less force than that of a larger person. While it comes down to vital targets, I would take a wrecking ball over a hammer. Oh, and I don't have muscle/fat to help protect me.



It might be that you are not getting the right training to optimally generate power in your strikes.  There are better ways, and not so good ways to strike.  Not all training is the same.  So you might want to take a look at your training and decide if you really understand how to develop maximum power.  If not, talk to your instructors.  If the answer you get is simply, "you need to get stronger", then the instruction you are getting is not very good.  

Food for thought.


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 30, 2013)

Well I guess the answer to the whole thread is Troll attacks work for sure. Everybody is just sitting around waiting to see how the show turns out. Please close this thread.


----------



## K-man (Dec 30, 2013)

Hyoho said:


> Well I guess the answer to the whole thread is Troll attacks work for sure. Everybody is just sitting around waiting to see how the show turns out. Please close this thread.


Oh no! Don't close the thread! I've only just found it and it looks like so much fun.  

I reckon this has the potential to go the full 100 pages from what I've read so far.
:lfao:


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 30, 2013)

Well as Kofu seems to be the underweight man this could go on forever.:lool:


----------



## seasoned (Dec 30, 2013)

_*ATTENTION ALL USERS:
*
_Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Wes Yager
Senior MT Moderator


----------



## lklawson (Dec 30, 2013)

Hyoho said:


> Well as Kofu seems to be the underweight man this could go on forever.:lool:


Well, due to the fact that nothing he's written thus far has given much reason to take him as a credible source, I don't really see much percentage in further interaction with him.There are some forums where you can argue with trolls, call 'em names, etc., and that can be fun sometimes, but this isn't one of those forums.  I don't see this thread going a lot further. Peace favor your sword,Kirk


----------



## K-man (Dec 30, 2013)

I just can't believe I've been ignoring this thread. I mean how exciting is it likely to be when some one asks if an 8 stone guy can beat up on an 18 stone MMA fighter?  I guess I was wrong! 



Kofo said:


> Sounds like you, like so many others got too much respect or fear for your trainer. If your trainer fought a twice his size  street criminal, with a killer instinct, then your trainer would lose big time.



My Aikido instructor is like that. Very difficult to stop or escape. I would back him against your street crim any day. It would be interesting to see though. My guy would be about 230 lbs I would imagine. That makes the street crim ... Mmm! ... 460 lb. Impressive, but morbidly obese. 



Kofo said:


> Time for reality check.
> 
> If you have two persons with identical technical and mental skills, then the biggest guy will win.
> 
> Hence the reason why all combat sports got weightclasses...



Mmm! No and no. Biggest guy may have a natural advantage but will not always win, or are you exaggerating the difference in size? As for weight class, here you are talking about a sporting contest,not the street. There it is not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog. 



Kofo said:


> People belived that stuff in the 80ies. How about that kyudan entering UFC ?
> 
> Didnt think so...



We have just gone through the exercise of sport vs traditional. Only a tiny percentage of martial artists aspire to fight in the ring and only a tiny tiny minority make it to the UFC.  To suggest that senior practitioners in any style need to prove their ability in the UFC is totally naive.



Kofo said:


> Well the "sensei respect" is probably worthy a discussion of its own. But my impression is that noone will beat their sensei in sparring because they think they cant or because they are afraid of some wicked revenge like a hit in the troat. Just imagine if theres a visiting master to the club and a yellow belt street guy beats the crap out of him ? The senseis are building an aura that they are unbeatable and knows secret technics unknown to the lower ranked that they will use if necessary. Like "You will learn so and so at 2. dan"



I would agree that the Sensei respect thing could warrant a thread of its own but your hypothesis is plain wrong. For a start you haven't defined sparring. Do you mean sparring as in boxing, sparring as in judo, sparring as in bunkai or something else again? Some of us don't spar in the conventional sense. I don't claim to be unbeatable. Anyone that can do that is current World Champion and even then he is only better than the person he beat. But I try as hard as I can to best my instructor and my students sure do their best to take me down, and good luck to them when they do. Ultimately my aim is for my students to be better than me. It's not an ego trip.



Kofo said:


> Realistically, no.
> 
> People who decide to train MA are nice middle class people who dont want to fight.
> 
> ...



Good grief! Are you from planet Earth? Some of the toughest guys around train MA and TMA at that. A lot of guys I have trained with have been in prison. Doesn't make them bigger or meaner than the next guy, except maybe in your mind.



Kofo said:


> Well, well
> 
> Its my opinion that mindset is the most important in self-defence. Not complicated technics, foot position etc.
> 
> ...



Some of the guys I train with are built like the proverbial brick outhouse and they have some great tats.



Kofo said:


> It depends of course on the blackbelt and the attacker, in every culture you got someone that looks like the ultimate public enemy. In Japan maybe a Yakuza ? So if a regular Japanese office worker, blackbelt, is facing a Yakuza you tell me who should freeze of the two ?



Why should anyone freeze! Yakusa or other, most are still human.



Kofo said:


> For me it is natural to separate Traditional Martial Arts from Boxing, Kickboxing and MMA because the difference is simply to big. Whenever you see a guy with a Karate or TKD background enter UFC or K1 you cant see any sign of their roots, its like they have to totally abandon their traditional style to stand a chance.



They don't abandon anything. Our fighting stance when I trained Japanese karate was a natural fighting stance, just like we trained. Pretty much the same as a boxer, just that we fought both stances.



Kofo said:


> I respect your opinion, but I feel that mindset is the most important. You see athletes choke under pressure in all sports, baseball, soccer, tennis etc They have all the training and so on, but still end up freezing at the most important time.
> 
> So when it comes to your regular guy blackbelt in a life and death situation, Im sorry, I just dont see him turning in to Jean Claude van Damme kicking the bad guys ***.



You obviously haven't trained in the right places. 



Kofo said:


> Why would a untrained, overweight, unskilled nice guy attack anyone ?
> 
> Normally because he had too much to drink!
> 
> If  you face a big mean bastard, those magic pressure points and whipping  strikes will do no harm at all. The attacker could be so full of  adrenalin, anger and drugs that he wont feel any pain.


Feeling pain is one thing, hitting the right spots is another. As I said above, drunk, on drugs or psycho .. they are still human and still can be beaten. Not to mention the fact that by that time you are also fuelled on adrenalin.



Kofo said:


> I agree to a lot of what is said, however MA magic is alive and kicking also in this tread.



I have never seen 'MA magic'. I've seen lots of crap stuff, but I don't believe in magic.



Kofo said:


> Please explain why a regular black belt would have a higher skill level than a regular tennis, football or hockey player ?



Hopefully your regular black belt with a minimum of five years training would have a higher skill level WRT fighting than your average tennis player, or the others.



Kofo said:


> Funny coming from a guy beliving in magic pressure points, too bad magic doesnt work in the UFC i guess.



As others have pointed out, there are many spots that boxers or others target. Surprise, surprise, they are all vital points, no magic, and they do work in UFC.



Kofo said:


> No one of course.



That was a question about skill sets whether anyone would think that that two skill sets were the same, yet you used it as an example in you post above. :idunno:



Kofo said:


> Nope thats just regular knock outs nothing like this stuff you belive in
> 
> Sorry I dont belive in this stuff. And neither does Guy Bloom, having withstanded these tricks,commented to the "instructor" on why he didnt go down. "It just didnt hurt enough"



Guy Bloom has a TMA background that he has modified to be more reality based, just like many of us on MT.

i have had so called experts try their stuff on me too. If they do it right it works, if they don't do it right it doesn't. Just like most things in this life.



Kofo said:


> Any reason you are so full of yourself ? What are you compensating for ? Lack of height ? Childhood bullying ?
> 
> Ouch! Not called for.
> 
> You just seem like a very insecure person in all your answers here on martialtalk. Like you really has to put the other person down. You are the only person acting like this towards me. The others might not have agreed with everything but they say where they feel I am right and offer their opinion where they disagree.


i know Chris personally. He's just a normal sort of guy, really. He can even be nice at times, in the right company. 



Kofo said:


> My enemy is not John Doe, he is not dangerous. I prepare for a strong, druged, psycho killer. That stuff wont stop him.



Fortunately most fights are with John, poor bugger. And he drinks far too much and his friends let him down. We are really fortunate in Australia. We don't have so many of the strong, drugged psycho killers on our streets. 



Kofo said:


> Probably more useful than kihon and kata. In cardio kickboxing they hit on pads dont they ? Not just on imaginary foes in the emty air.



All styles, boxing, BJJ, judo, karate, aikido etc have kihon. The comment means you have no real idea of the basics of any style. Kata is totally different and means different things to different people. However if I were you I wouldn't talk too much about kata. It is obvious you have no idea of it either.

Oh, we put on pads to, and mouth guards and head protectors etc. We very rarely attack empty air, it doesn't hit back.



Kofo said:


> So what kind of person do you train to defend against ?
> 
> Regular guys dont attack anybody, _unless_ something have triggered an insane, psycotic anger.
> 
> I hope none of you guys never gets attacked by a "real" killer criminal. He will see right threw you, he will see in your eyes that you are not a violent man. And _whatever_ you do, DO NOT, get into some stupid martial arts fighting position, you will just fuel his anger.



OMG! I think you have been watching too many scary movies. Most of our "real" killer criminals are in jail. But you're right. I hope no one gets attacked by a "real"killer criminal either.

But thanks for the entertainment, it's been a lot of fun. :wavey:


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 30, 2013)

Kofo said:


> So what kind of person do you train to defend against ?



I train to defend against someone like myself. If I know how many ways that I can attack my opponent, I should also know how to deal with all those situations. For example, I like to use groin kick, face punch combo. If my opponent throws a groin kick, I should assume that his face punch will come next.

IMO, the most common attack will be:

- jab,
- hook/haymaker,
- front/side kick,
- roundhouse kick,
- foot sweep,
- single leg or double legs attack.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 30, 2013)

Due to JKS's comments, this will be a little more restrained than it should be... 



Kofo said:


> Nope thats just regular knock outs nothing like this stuff you belive in



Kofo, you have absolutely no idea what I "believe in". The only person to have mentioned such things as "magic pressure point" usage is you. Not me, son, you. As I said, you really don't seem to know what Kyusho is (it's not what's seen in the clip you posted, by the way... that's closer to the cult/George Dilman kinda thing, which is nothing like the actual stuff, or what I teach and train). Kyusho can be looked on as basically a concept of targeting... go back to the clip I posted. I counted most of our most common targets (kyusho) being used... kasumi, asagasumi, suigetsu, butsumetsu, hadome, jinchu, menbu, etc.... but, of course, as it doesn't have a "magic, mystic" appearance, you don't think martial arts actually deal in it? This is what I meant when I said this wasn't a debate... there's not enough information on your side to form an argument.



Kofo said:


> Sorry I dont belive in this stuff. And neither does Guy Bloom, having withstanded these tricks,commented to the "instructor" on why he didnt go down. "It just didnt hurt enough"



What makes you think I believe in what they're presenting, or how they're presenting it? I'm quite serious here, what on earth makes you think I subscribe to such things? Oh, but as to Guy's comment, "hurting enough" isn't really part of it... talk to the guys who got knocked out in the ring... did it "hurt enough"? Or did they just wake up wondering what happened?



Kofo said:


> Any reason you are so full of yourself ? What are you compensating for ? Lack of height ? Childhood bullying ?
> 
> You just seem like a very insecure person in all your answers here on martialtalk. Like you really has to put the other person down. You are the only person acting like this towards me. The others might not have agreed with everything but they say where they feel I am right and offer their opinion where they disagree.



Well, you've really missed your take on me, then.

I haven't put you down. I've pointed out that you are frankly well and truly out of your depth here, and have no actual understanding of any of the subjects you're trying to discuss. You have also avoided answering any questions, either ignoring them outright or giving a deflection with no answer, and then continued spouting the same ill-informed nonsense that you've been called on by everyone else in the thread. What am I compensating for? Your lack of knowledge.



Kofo said:


> My enemy is not John Doe, he is not dangerous. I prepare for a strong, druged, psycho killer. That stuff wont stop him.



You really don't know what you're likely to face... wasting time talking or thinking (fantasizing) about some "strong, drugged, psycho killer" is pointless. You might as well only think about fighting James Bond... or Conan the Barbarian. Get some understanding about real violence, real attackers, the most common scenarios and situations, the difference between the varying forms of violence, learn what a resource predator is, what the monkey dance is, what the aim of social violence is versus asocial violence, what weapons are likely to be encountered, what the laws are around you, an understanding of psychology (both your own and your potential attacker), and so on and so forth. Then you'll be more in a position to talk about what works and what doesn't.



Xue Sheng said:


> Much why I asked the questions I did, that remain unanswered, in post #34



Yeah, I've noticed that pattern as well.... 



lklawson said:


> I remember seeing the Tae-Bo commercials with some woman talking to the camera about how much safer she feels now that she can defend herself thanks to Tae-Bo!



Ha, yeah.... just shaking my head when I saw those.... 



Kofo said:


> Probably more useful than kihon and kata. In cardio kickboxing they hit on pads dont they ? Not just on imaginary foes in the emty air.



No, they don't. Kihon, on the other hand, is a constant refinement and development of skill in application of the basic, fundamental mechanics and actions of a system... it's pretty much the major thing that does work. I mean, the MMA world version of it is bag work, transition drills, and similar... are you saying that actually practicing your most basic techniques doesn't have a use? But, at the same time, you were complaining that complicated things didn't work earlier... hmm.

Oh, and you don't understand kata.



Kofo said:


> So what kind of person do you train to defend against ?



Depends on which of my systems you're talking about here... but, to keep it to modern self defence, I train for the most common forms of attack in my society... which aren't really anything like what you're talking about.



Kofo said:


> Regular guys dont attack anybody, _unless_ something have triggered an insane, psycotic anger.



Er, no, actually. Regular guys attack other people all the time. Could be an emotional trigger, could be alcohol, could be ego, could be greed, could be fear, could be jealousy, could be any of a wide range of reasons. It's not just career criminals and Bane out there getting into fights.

Your grip on reality doesn't seem particularly strong, honestly. That's not an attack, it's an observation. And it's also the cause of the issues you're getting in the responses from myself and others here.



Kofo said:


> I hope none of you guys never gets attacked by a "real" killer criminal. He will see right threw you, he will see in your eyes that you are not a violent man. And _whatever_ you do, DO NOT, get into some stupid martial arts fighting position, you will just fuel his anger.



Your "real" killer criminal doesn't exist outside of very extreme, particular circumstances and circles. But, to the point, who said I'm not violent? Believe me, when my eyes are looked into, it's not what you're thinking there...

Your last comment (about not adopting "some stupid martial arts fighting position") is almost correct (although I might add that such phrasing can be taken as "art bashing", which is against the rules, worthy of reporting, and can lead to some, uh, repercussions...). I would also not recommend adopting anything that gives away your background... not that it'll "fuel their anger", as you've made an assumption that's frankly not supported by reality.



Flying Crane said:


> It might be that you are not getting the right training to optimally generate power in your strikes.  There are better ways, and not so good ways to strike.  Not all training is the same.  So you might want to take a look at your training and decide if you really understand how to develop maximum power.  If not, talk to your instructors.  If the answer you get is simply, "you need to get stronger", then the instruction you are getting is not very good.
> 
> Food for thought.



Ah, on topic! Nice! Agreed!


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 30, 2013)

K-man said:


> i know Chris personally. He's just a normal sort of guy, really. He can even be nice at times, in the right company.



"Nice"?!?! "Normal"?!?!?!?!?

...............grumble-grumble-grumble-libel-grumble-grumble-slander-grumble-grumble...........


----------



## RTKDCMB (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Well the "sensei respect" is probably worthy a discussion of its own. But my impression is that noone will beat their sensei in sparring because they think they cant or because they are afraid of some wicked revenge like a hit in the troat. Just imagine if theres a visiting master to the club and a yellow belt street guy beats the crap out of him ? The senseis are building an aura that they are unbeatable and knows secret technics unknown to the lower ranked that they will use if necessary. Like "You will learn so and so at 2. dan"





Kofo said:


> Sounds like you, like so many others got too much  respect or fear for your trainer. If your trainer fought a twice his  size  street criminal, with a killer instinct, then your trainer would  lose big time.





Kofo said:


> Time for reality check.
> 
> If you have two persons with identical technical and mental skills, then the biggest guy will win.
> 
> Hence the reason why all combat sports got weightclasses...






Kofo said:


> People belived that stuff in the 80ies. How about that kyudan entering UFC ?
> 
> Didnt think so...






Kofo said:


> Realistically, no.
> 
> People who decide to train MA are nice middle class people who dont want to fight.
> 
> ...



Oh great, another one.


----------



## K-man (Dec 31, 2013)

Chris Parker said:


> "Nice"?!?! "Normal"?!?!?!?!?
> 
> ...............grumble-grumble-grumble-libel-grumble-grumble-slander-grumble-grumble...........


OK! OK! So I exaggerate at times. Don't ruin the image.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Well, well
> 
> Its my opinion that mindset is the most important in self-defence. Not complicated technics, foot position etc.



There are many things of importance, you don't just need one thing.



Kofo said:


> Its common sense that the biggest guys win when skill set is identical.



A bit overly simplistic, there is also aggression level, intent and state of mind. A big lazy guy can be beaten by a small intense guy even if the skills are identical.



Kofo said:


> Why would anyone do traditional MA if he wanted to fight ? The logical thing would be to start boxing, kickb or MMA. The majority of people who start with traditional MA want to learn self defense. They do not wanna do realistic full contact sparring, if so they would of course join boxing or MMA.



Full contact sparring is not entirely realistic either, if it was then you would not be able to do it for very long without serious injuries unless you add protective gear and rules that say where you can and cannot strike.



Kofo said:


> Why doesnt criminals train traditional Martial Arts if it really works magic in a street fight ?



Because one thing TMA's are supposed to teach is good character, criminals would be kicked out so they don't harm the schools reputation.



Kofo said:


> Muscle is of course a major part of self defense, only a professional fighter would stand a chance in a fight against a 2 meter tall Strong man competitor, your average club black belt wouldnt stand a chance. The level of a black belt is not relatively any better than a recreational tennisplayer compared to Rafael Nadal.
> 
> MA would probably work wonders towards a traditional drunk. I actually belive that.
> 
> However MA got no chance when the oponent is a seasoned, traumatized, ruthless criminal, used to a hard life in and out of prison. Just the look of his muscular body, tatoos and psycotic eyes would make 99% of black belts freeze.



:bs:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Dec 31, 2013)

lklawson said:


> I remember seeing the Tae-Bo commercials with some woman talking to the camera about how much safer she feels now that she can defend herself thanks to Tae-Bo!
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



If you do Tae Bo for self defense at least you would be fit when you get beaten up.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 31, 2013)

Dirty Dog said:


> :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
> 
> You don't actually have a clue what you're talking about do you?
> 
> I think conflicts involving Freddy Krueger are not nearly as common in the real world as they apparently are in your fantasy world.



Answer this then, how much anger would it take for you to attack someone ? Not self defence, but attack. Someone that didnt want to fight you at all. Im betting you must have developed some really strong anger. Have you ever tried putting clothes on a 2 year old that doesnt want too ? The strength they develop is just incredible. And it is fueled by anger.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 31, 2013)

K-man said:


> Hopefully your regular black belt with a minimum of five years training would have a higher skill level WRT fighting than your average tennis player, or the others.



That is of course not the issue. If a person start MA at 20 years old and another starts tennis. After 5 years of training I am sure gonna tell you that the tennis player is gonna be nowhere near world class level in _tennis_. So why is the MA guy with a black belt and 5 years of training really gonna be any good at all ?


----------



## Kofo (Dec 31, 2013)

K-man said:


> All styles, boxing, BJJ, judo, karate, aikido etc have kihon. The comment means you have no real idea of the basics of any style. Kata is totally different and means different things to different people. However if I were you I wouldn't talk too much about kata. It is obvious you have no idea of it either.
> 
> Oh, we put on pads to, and mouth guards and head protectors etc. We very rarely attack empty air, it doesn't hit back.



Funny how you guys twist everything to your advantage

Shadow boxing= kihon or kata. Difference of course is that shadow boxing is like how a boxer would move in a real fight.

KO=Pressure points. They never talk like that in boxing, its just him in the head as hard as you can.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 31, 2013)

K-man said:


> They don't abandon anything. Our fighting stance when I trained Japanese karate was a natural fighting stance, just like we trained. Pretty much the same as a boxer, just that we fought both stances.



Then why not just train kickboxing ?


----------



## Kofo (Dec 31, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Oh great, another one.



If what I trained was, always questioned and even ridiculed, and declining in popularity. I would stop and think, hey it might be something to it.


----------



## Drose427 (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> That is of course not the issue. If a person start MA at 20 years old and another starts tennis. After 5 years of training I am sure gonna tell you that the tennis player is gonna be nowhere near world class level in _tennis_. So why is the MA guy with a black belt and 5 years of training really gonna be any good at all?



The Black belt doesnt really have to be good, just better than the attacker. 5 years may not be much, but thats 5 years training to defend themselves. Thats 5 years more than the angry street guy who will most likely be swinging wild and not paying attention to anything he's doing. At that point things could go in the Black belts favor simply a because he paid attention and didnt get hit. Haymakers arent too hard to avoid. If nothing else that black belt will no how to get out of the way after 5 years of training, at least I'd hope so.


----------



## Kofo (Dec 31, 2013)

Drose427 said:


> The Black belt doesnt really have to be good, just better than the attacker. 5 years may not be much, but thats 5 years training to defend themselves. Thats 5 years more than the angry street guy who will most likely be swinging wild and not paying attention to anything he's doing. At that point things could go in the Black belts favor simply a because he paid attention and didnt get hit. Haymakers arent too hard to avoid. If nothing else that black belt will no how to get out of the way after 5 years of training, at least I'd hope so.



1. Is it enaugh if the attacker is biger stronger and a real bad guy

2. Is there some other training method that will give a higher SD level after 5 y of training


----------



## Drose427 (Dec 31, 2013)

you keep saying a real bad guy, but anyone could be a real bad guy. Many assaults arent committed by a rapist or killer, just some pissed off or offended dude. Also, I highly doubt in that BB's 5 years of training he didnt have to learn how to defend themselves against someone much larger than themselves, even with intent to harm the BB should still be more prepared to protect themselves than a giant, untrained, adrenaline hindered attacker. Plus, its not the method that really matters. A BB at any semi-reputable martial arts school still gives someone a higher SD level than someone untrained. Someone poorly trained in MMA or BJJ (two popular choices people consider for SD) could easily lose to someone well trained in anything else.


----------



## SENC-33 (Dec 31, 2013)

I have been around violence my entire adult life Kofo. I train "specifically" for violent confrontations (physically and mentally). I have seen huge men get their arses ripped to shreds by smaller "underweight" guys because the little man struck the big man when the big man didn't see it coming......Our bodies are vulnerable plain and simple.


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> If what I trained was, always questioned and even ridiculed, and declining in popularity. I would stop and think, hey it might be something to it.



actually, what I train in is declining in popularity quite severely.  Very few people do it, and far fewer do it well.  To someone who was raised on a steady diet of MMA type competitions, our methods do not look like what they believe a fighting method should look like.  People don't understand it when they see it, they question it, some people even ridicule it.  But I don't decide what I will do or not do based on the ignorance of others.  I don't care what anyone else thinks.  I understand the value in my training methods, even if you or someone else does not.  Making sure that everyone else agrees with what I am doing simply does not have a place on my list of priorities.

you are welcome to your opinions.  I'm generally happy to engage in a discussion and help educate someone about what I do, but I have no interest in trying to force you to change your opinion.  That often means that at some point the discussion simply ends.  Believe what you like.  It has zero impact on me.


----------



## SENC-33 (Dec 31, 2013)

If your means and methods instill confidence in your ability to defend yourself it doesn't really matter if others ridicule it or not.......


----------



## lklawson (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> KO=Pressure points. They never talk like that in boxing, its just him in the head as hard as you can.


It's not my fault that you are willfully ignorant and in denial.  Every boxer knows about "the button."  And I've given you one very specific reference (although there are several others) to a boxer writing on the topic of choosing specific target points which are "the most vulnerable part(s) of a boxer's body..."  He actually mentions no fewer than *six *specific body points to target (which are *not *"just hit him in the head"), one of which he writes that repeated hits there will "sooner or later, bring on a state of paralysis" to the limb which, "the result ... a boxer will often be forced to retire, actually believing that his arm is broken."  -The Art of In Fighting, Frank Klaus (Middle-Weight Champion of the World)

And that's on top of other, commonly known, spots such as "the liver shot."

Plugging your ears and going, "nanananananana I can't heaaaar youuuuu nanananananana" doesn't make it cease to exist.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 31, 2013)

Interesting....you (Kofo) respond to all sorts of posts but never to these questions....



Xue Sheng said:


> Now before this can move forward you really need to answer my above questions which are
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Xue Sheng said:


> Do you actually train anything?



your silence is an answer and gives me reason to believe your just another Armchair MMAist....happy new year and have a nice day


----------



## K-man (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> That is of course not the issue. If a person start MA at 20 years old and another starts tennis. After 5 years of training I am sure gonna tell you that the tennis player is gonna be nowhere near world class level in _tennis_. So why is the MA guy with a black belt and 5 years of training really gonna be any good at all ?



There are differences between tennis and martial arts. Actually they are radically different.  But I am totally confused. I teach Krav Maga. Give me a weekend and I will have anyone to a level where they can give a fair account of themselves in a real fight. They don't need to be world class athletes. Why would you question that a person who has trained diligently for five years in a TMA would have sufficient skill to defend them self on the street? 



Kofo said:


> Funny how you guys twist everything to your advantage
> 
> Shadow boxing= kihon or kata. Difference of course is that shadow boxing is like how a boxer would move in a real fight.
> 
> KO=Pressure points. They never talk like that in boxing, its just him in the head as hard as you can.



As I said, you are using words you don't understand. Kihon means basic, pure and simple. Kata in karate are fighting systems. Do we fight like we drill kata? No, it is a training tool. The detail is in the bunkai. Do we fight like we train bunkai? You betcha! 

As for vital points, you obviously have no idea so no point even discussing them.

So what have I twisted to my advantage? I train several reality based martial arts. I don't punch and kick fresh air. I train to fight the same way as many other martial artists train to fight. I like many others here have decades of experience and I am twisting something to my advantage? Priceless!



Kofo said:


> Then why not just train kickboxing ?



Have you even considered that some people don't want to be kick boxers? 



Kofo said:


> 1. Is it enaugh if the attacker is biger stronger and a real bad guy
> 
> 2. Is there some other training method that will give a higher SD level after 5 y of training


I consider my black belts to be adequately prepared to defend themselves against anyone on the street. And no, I don't believe there is any training that would better prepare people to defend themselves on the street after 5 years training. I'm not saying what I teach is better than what others are teaching, just that it is as good as the best I have seen. Is what I teach the best to compete in UFC? Certainly not. Our training is not directed that way at all.
:asian:


----------



## Hyoho (Dec 31, 2013)

No, but I tried taking the clothes off a 20 year old than didnt want to.

 Lol Kofu you certainly have a lot of what ifs.

Defense is about a calm collected response to a given situation. That's why we do MA. 

You treat your opponent as an honoured guest. Watch any good fighter in control of a situation regardless of size and you will see this.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Have you ever tried putting clothes on a 2 year old that doesnt want too ? The strength they develop is just incredible. And it is fueled by anger.



So you got beat up by a 2 year old? :idunno:


----------



## frank raud (Dec 31, 2013)

Kofo said:


> Then why not just train kickboxing ?


 A good friend of mine got his black belt in Japanese jiu jitsu AFTER his 15 year career as PKA middleweight champion of the world. He is a legend in kickboxing, Jean-Yves Theriault. You do not want to be hit by this man. Yet, he found enough value in this worthless old fashioned art to spend about 6 years training to get his black belt.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 31, 2013)

Well, you seem to be ignoring anything I (or Xue) ask, so I'll deal with the "answers" you are giving... but, should you get a chance, you might find you have some more credibility if you go back and see about answering our questions... such as what training background you actually have, where your ideas come from, and so on... 



Kofo said:


> Answer this then, how much anger would it take for you to attack someone ? Not self defence, but attack. Someone that didnt want to fight you at all. Im betting you must have developed some really strong anger. Have you ever tried putting clothes on a 2 year old that doesnt want too ? The strength they develop is just incredible. And it is fueled by anger.



2 year olds don't want to be dressed, and you think that's the same as anger, or an aggressive attacker? Dealt with both, and no, they're really not related at all.... for one thing, knocking out the child is typically frowned upon.... for another, anger isn't always a factor in attacks... and when it is, it's less likely to be the big, drugged, psycho killer you keep harping on about. So that analogy fails on, well, every single point, really.

But, to answer your question (see how this works?), how much anger would it take for me to attack someone? None at all. Mind you, I'd need a good motivating reason.... it's just that anger isn't that powerful a motivator, nor is it the only, sole, or primary one in most attacks.



Kofo said:


> That is of course not the issue. If a person start MA at 20 years old and another starts tennis. After 5 years of training I am sure gonna tell you that the tennis player is gonna be nowhere near world class level in _tennis_. So why is the MA guy with a black belt and 5 years of training really gonna be any good at all ?



Sure, and you can get a degree in 3 years, but it takes 12 to get past high school... you're trying to compare apples and jackhammers. But, again, to answer the question (see, it's just that easy!), a martial artist with 5 years training and a black belt to show for it is going to be good enough to be awarded a black belt in that art. What that particular art teaches is another question, of course... and the idea that a black belt is automatically a devastating killing machine martial arts expert Chuck Norris beating Bruce Lee re-incarnation just shows that you don't even know the first thing about what you're trying to argue against. A black belt is a black belt. They are someone who has achieved the standards of that art to reach that rank. If part of those standards are fighting ability, then it's reasonable to assume that they are "gonna be any good" when it comes down to it. Why would the MA guy with five years of training and a black belt NOT be any good?



Kofo said:


> Funny how you guys twist everything to your advantage
> 
> Shadow boxing= kihon or kata. Difference of course is that shadow boxing is like how a boxer would move in a real fight.
> 
> KO=Pressure points. They never talk like that in boxing, its just him in the head as hard as you can.



Shadow boxing does not equal kihon, and it absolutely does not equal kata. Footwork and slipping drills, along with bag work are more in line with kihon... and boxing doesn't have an equivalent of kata. The reason is that kata is designed to teach/instil a particular set of skills/responses, whereas competitive forms (such as boxing) prefer an individually geared approach.

Boxing absolutely talks about targeting as specific points. The fact that you're unaware of that, even after being informed by both Kirk and myself, again shows that you're simply way out of your depth here.



Kofo said:


> Then why not just train kickboxing ?



Well, for me, because it's highly limiting, single context, and has none of the depth I'm looking for. Plus I have no interest in competition.



Kofo said:


> If what I trained was, always questioned and even ridiculed, and declining in popularity. I would stop and think, hey it might be something to it.



But... do you even train in anything? Both Xue and I have asked that repeatedly... as I mentioned when I first asked, your profile only states your "Primary Art and Rank" as "real self defence"... but your posts show no real understanding of what real self defence is, let alone anything to do with martial arts. So, one more time... what is your training background, and where have you formed your ideas from?



Kofo said:


> 1. Is it enaugh if the attacker is biger stronger and a real bad guy
> 
> 2. Is there some other training method that will give a higher SD level after 5 y of training



1: Yes. But such a person is largely a product of an overactive and largely ignorant imagination (combined with a fair bit of fear, commonly... not saying that's the case here, just that it's a common factor).

2: From what I do? Not that I've ever seen. And I (as well as the rest of my organisation) am constantly researching and studying to ensure what I present is the best around. If I find something better, I include it.



SENC-33 said:


> If your means and methods instill confidence in your ability to defend yourself it doesn't really matter if others ridicule it or not.......



Sure, to a point. We could go back to the TaeBo women saying that it made them feel more confident... if it came down to it, and they had to rely on Billy Blanks' teachings to music, would it really help? Or would it have given a false confidence which could see them in more trouble by trying something they shouldn't?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 1, 2014)

Kofo said:


> Answer this then, how much anger would it take for you to attack someone ? Not self defence, but attack. Someone that didnt want to fight you at all.



I have no idea, because I have never done anything of the sort. However, I will say that I am regularly (far too regularly) involved in confrontations in the ER in which I am the one who doesn't want to fight at all. I'd say beer muscles have far more to do with these confrontations than real anger. I will also say that the sort of "insane psychotic rage" you think is common, simply is not. The very few cases I have seen of "insane psychotic rage" were actually quit easy to deal with simply because someone in that state is incapable of fighting effectively.



Kofo said:


> Im betting you must have developed some really strong anger. Have you ever tried putting clothes on a 2 year old that doesnt want too ? The strength they develop is just incredible. And it is fueled by anger.



Completely wrong. If a two year old impresses you with their strength, then I would suggest perhaps you need to do a bit of strength building.
Two year olds are not strong. Period. Even when they're throwing a temper tantrum. What they are is squirmy and being held by people who are afraid of hurting them, and unsure how to hold them without hurting them. I've held countless two year old down, not just to get them dressed, but for unpleasant procedures.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 1, 2014)

Kofo said:


> If what I trained was, always questioned and even ridiculed, and declining in popularity. I would stop and think, hey it might be something to it.



In your case, I have already seen a number of people question your training, including wondering if you actually have any, and although it has stopped short of ridicule (our TOS requires that, and most posters abide by the TOS), I have to wonder... was this just rhetoric, or will you now "stop and think, hey it might be something to it"?

On the other hand, why should any of us care what the completely ignorant think about our Arts? I suspect that we, as practitioners, know more about the scope and capabilities of those arts than the completely ignorant.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 1, 2014)

Wow never thought Id see a 2 year old described as having incredible strength


----------



## K-man (Jan 1, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Wow never thought Id see a 2 year old described as having incredible strength


Wasn't that how Superman started?


----------



## drewtoby (Jan 1, 2014)

Some good discussion going on here. The defenders/attackers mental state deserves more credit than typically given. Compensation, situational awareness, type of training, and quality of training count for a lot too. We all have more strength than we think under an adrenaline rush, knowledge to use the strength only helps. The 2 year old thing is true... if they can strike you in a vital area. Technique can also make up for lack of strength, as I'm learning new punching techniques as well.

A good point brought up is that everyone has their flaws, even instructors. That and weapons/killer mentality will give ANYONE a bad day, no matter their training. They revert back to animalistic nature. Not an easy thing for anyone to deal with.

Transferring schools has been eye opening for me. Glad I made the switch!


----------



## Hyoho (Jan 2, 2014)

@drewtoby, I'll go with that. I used to run a kindergarden. Kids hiding behind doors to give you uppercuts to vital areas and run away had me in severe pain more than once. Baby eye pokes are tough too.


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2014)

Kofo said:


> Sounds like you, like so many others got too much respect or fear for your trainer. If your trainer fought a twice his size  street criminal, with a killer instinct, then your trainer would lose big time.



So, basically you're saying that all arts are a joke?


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2014)

Kofo said:


> Realistically, no.
> 
> People who decide to train MA are nice middle class people who dont want to fight.
> 
> ...



So, you're lumping everyone that trains, into the same group?  Hmm...ok. Granted, not everyone has SD as their primary goal, but I wouldn't put everyone into that group.  So, the badguy is going to train MMA but not a regular art...because the regular art isn't going to work?  LOL...alrighty then.


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2014)

Kofo said:


> Well, well
> 
> Its my opinion that mindset is the most important in self-defence. Not complicated technics, foot position etc.
> 
> ...



LMFAO!!  Are you another one of those MMA nut riders, who frequents this place?  I'm going to disagree with....well, all of this.  Just an FYI...one of my close friends and teachers, has worked for the Dept. Of Corrections for over 20yrs.  He's dealt with all types of seasoned, traumatized, ruthless, big bad meanies, and he's still alive.


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2014)

Kofo said:


> Any reason you are so full of yourself ? What are you compensating for ? Lack of height ? Childhood bullying ?



Perhaps you should be asking yourself these questions?



> You just seem like a very insecure person in all your answers here on martialtalk. Like you really has to put the other person down. You are the only person acting like this towards me. The others might not have agreed with everything but they say where they feel I am right and offer their opinion where they disagree.



Hmm...Chris has been a member of this forum for quite a while, and has quite a bit of knowledge.  You however, join up in Dec. '13, and start spewing the same junk that countless others before you have.  Perhaps you're getting the replies you are, because of your posts.


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2014)

K-man said:


> Oh no! Don't close the thread! I've only just found it and it looks like so much fun.
> 
> I reckon this has the potential to go the full 100 pages from what I've read so far.
> :lfao:



LOL, why yes, it's very similar to that last train wreck.   Shame too, as we almost made it to 100 in that thread! LOL!


----------



## drewtoby (Jan 2, 2014)

MJS said:


> LOL, why yes, it's very similar to that last train wreck.   Shame too, as we almost made it to 100 in that thread! LOL!



Did I start an almost 100 page thread? Add that to the old resume...

Back to the MMA vs TMA I guess. MJS brought up a good point. Its either or. Either self defense training works or it does not, regardless of TMA vs MMA. And we all know it works for the most part. No one is invincible, but good training is enough to save your own life.

My whole problem now is the "realistically" part. If you are being mugged, you give your wallet. If being challenged to a fight, you avoid it (if possible). That leaves self defense for mainly against a crazed/multiple crazed attackers (most likely with weapons). Knockout game, rapists, being jumped, ect. A singular (and most likely unarmed guy) vs. 

As was brought up before, fighting spirit counts for a lot. With out it, even the best instructors would loose. With it, untrained people would win. 

So, back to MJS's comment: for true self defense, does almost everything come down to the fighting spirit, to the extent that training almost becomes a singular factor, such as endurance?


----------



## K-man (Jan 2, 2014)

drewtoby said:


> Did I start an almost 100 page thread? Add that to the old resume...
> 
> Don't get too carried away. Your best thread didn't even make 100'posts.
> 
> ...


Simple answer to your last point .... no! And, in most fights endurance isn't an issue either, unless you're talking competition fighting.
:asian:


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2014)

drewtoby said:


> Did I start an almost 100 page thread? Add that to the old resume...



LOL! No, that would be the one I started here:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php/112643-Sport-And-TMA-Again

K-Man and I were just making the reference to that other thread, because lately, it seems like certain threads tend to drift towards a MMA discussion, even when that's not the original topic.  



> Back to the MMA vs TMA I guess. MJS brought up a good point. Its either or. Either self defense training works or it does not, regardless of TMA vs MMA. And we all know it works for the most part. No one is invincible, but good training is enough to save your own life.



Agreed!!  



> My whole problem now is the "realistically" part. If you are being mugged, you give your wallet. If being challenged to a fight, you avoid it (if possible). That leaves self defense for mainly against a crazed/multiple crazed attackers (most likely with weapons). Knockout game, rapists, being jumped, ect. A singular (and most likely unarmed guy) vs.



Yup.  Although situation depending, I personally don't always agree with the compliance with the mugger, but again, that's just me.   Of course, it's possible to go your entire life or a good part of it, and never have to defend yourself.  However, I'd rather have the skills and not need them, than to need them and wish I had 'em.  



> As was brought up before, fighting spirit counts for a lot. With out it, even the best instructors would loose. With it, untrained people would win.
> 
> So, back to MJS's comment: for true self defense, does almost everything come down to the fighting spirit, to the extent that training almost becomes a singular factor, such as endurance?



I would say that having the desire, will, spirit, etc., is important.  I've seen people cringe at the idea of doing something that'll hurt someone else.  Kind of makes you want to ask them why they're training in the first place. LOL.  Of course, that stuff, IMO, is part of it.  Being aware, and exercising some good common sense, also goes a very long way.


----------



## SENC-33 (Jan 2, 2014)

Self defense is obviously about avoidance first but if avoidance isn't an option you train to control adrenaline, you train to strike pre-emptively and end the threat and you train to get away as quickly as possible.

If endurance becomes a factor you have failed at the above ^^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## drewtoby (Jan 5, 2014)

Thanks everyone for your contribution! I have one last follow up question...

I now know strength and training are all elements for a self defense situation, with training usually being more helpful. 

Knowing this, would it be more beneficial for me to seek out additional training in the summers (being a student, I'll be free) or to start going to the gym for more than just cardio? I'm insanely busy in the winter, but could cram in two days a week for muscle retention. If I start a new art, I may have to go dormant during the winter months or cut back to one lesson a week. I always find time for hapkido year round though


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 5, 2014)

Hmm... it's actually not something anyone here can answer. We don't know your training, it's focus, your level of ability, your training, your schedule (aside from the vague impression given here), what you actually need to focus on, where you need improvement, or anything else that would factor into an informed answer.

In general, though, more of the same training (for consistency and improvement) would be my advice... either more classes (at the same art) or more home training. Cardio is the best usage of your gym time.


----------



## Zero (Jan 29, 2014)

Kofo said:


> Muscle is of course a major part of self defense, *only a professional fighter would stand a chance in a fight against a 2 meter tall Strong man competitor*, your average club black belt wouldnt stand a chance.


Hey Kofo (if you still about)!
A lot of what you have said in your posts does have some hard truths to it Kofo.  But the above (and sorry for not commenting on this the other day when this thread was hotter than a wildfire), without qualification (which is a view so often seen), does bug me and is far from the truth.  
Yes, if a large bodybuilder/power lifter or strongman gets you in a tight grip, boxed in a corner or ends up on top of you, you may be in trouble.  But don't be thinking that the muscles and strength necessarily makes them able to deliver more effective blows than a trained and experienced fighter or that they know what to do with such strength, such as joint locks/kimura etc. The blunt trauma of their blows/swings will be pretty severe, however, I would rather take a shot from them than a top class boxer, even of a lower weight division.  Unless they have fight training also, these big guys, due to their size are dangerous, but are not experienced in dishing out hurt - and often not in receiving that kind of hurt.  The muscles they have do not protect them (except from front on attacks to torso) from damage. Their knees/joints and jaw are still just as susceptible as anyone elses.
Further, if they do get you in their grips, if you are an experienced grappler or MA practitioner, then the soft targets are still just as viable, they are not used to protecting these or working through the pain of eye gouges, knees/strikes to the groin, frontal throat strikes etc.
Even quite a few bouncers I have come across, some who have been friends or at least acquaintences, are purely of the deterent type, being muscle bound and without flexibility or speed, or any real fighting skill.
Yes, size counts.  And yes, a big chap who _has _hand skills is one to be feared - but your strongman is not in that category. 

I am nothing like the strongmen of course but I used to powerlift and have roughhoused in the gym with lifters and body builders who were big guys and that have seen me work the heavy bag in the gym and wanted to have some fun.  I can tell you, they don't expect a foot sweep/foot stamp or even high kick to head.

Guys that say of big fighters, ie trained fighters "don't worry, he won't be able to handle your speed" do make me chuckle.  But your comment is equally in the same vein.


----------



## Zero (Jan 29, 2014)

And no, drewtoby didn't pay me (as yet) five bucks to keep this thread going past the 100 post mark...


----------



## TKDTony2179 (Feb 7, 2014)

Kofo said:


> Nope thats just regular knock outs nothing like this stuff you belive in
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I believe in the pressure point system but at the same time I don't think it is that easy to do it with a resisting person. Same as some throws and some joint locks. They just about have to be right on time and you must be in the right moment to make it happen. Just like what Chris P. showed in the video of the UFC knock outs those are some points being struck. Behind the ear ( you see that a lot with kicks and punches) and solar pelexus are two number one spot to strike but the ones on the foot, under the eye, on the hands, arms, left pec, under the arms, on the traps, on your back, and where ever else are harder to find and some people just really do have a higher since for pain. I did talk with the guy in the video you posted and yet he said the samething. You do see them in UFC competition but rarely do you see them chain linking the pressure points.  Remember, most of the pressure points are just used for acropuncture (forgive me if misspelled.)


----------



## wingchun100 (Feb 28, 2014)

drewtoby said:


> I keep coming back to this question. I'm 6 foot and weigh in at a scale-tipping 140lbs (I run) :mst:, and have been training in hapkido the past several years. I know hapkido is designed to not be dependent on strength, but being so light gives me a lot smaller margin of error with my locks/throws/ect. Also, it makes several throws/locks not viable in a real life scenario.
> 
> Then we come to the striking issue: if I am unable to throw or lock my opponent for whatever reason, my strikes have significantly less force than that of a larger person. While it comes down to vital targets, I would take a wrecking ball over a hammer. Oh, and I don't have muscle/fat to help protect me.
> 
> ...



I think in most cases it IS possible because, knowing we are at a size disadvantage, we will be more "scrappy" than the other person who thinks they have an easy win on their hand. I am only 5'7", so a lot of people are bigger than me. But if I were cornered, my lack of strength wouldn't be a disadvantage because I would fight "dirty" and use my environment. Maybe that 6 foot tall behemoth won't feel anything if I punch him, but you can bet he will feel it if I use his momentum to send him flying into a brick wall or trip him face-first into the ground.


----------



## K-man (Feb 28, 2014)

wingchun100 said:


> I think in most cases it IS possible because, knowing we are at a size disadvantage, we will be more "scrappy" than the other person who thinks they have an easy win on their hand. I am only 5'7", so a lot of people are bigger than me. But if I were cornered, my lack of strength wouldn't be a disadvantage because I would fight "dirty" and use my environment. Maybe that 6 foot tall behemoth won't feel anything if I punch him, but you can bet he will feel it if I use his momentum to send him flying into a brick wall or trip him face-first into the ground.


And if he is fighting "dirty" as well or if he is well balanced?


----------



## wingchun100 (Mar 1, 2014)

That wasn't the OP's question. He asked if it was realistic for an underweight man to protect himself, and I gave my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear (Mar 1, 2014)

TKDTony2179 said:


> I believe in the pressure point system but at the same time I don't think it is that easy to do it with a resisting person. Same as some throws and some joint locks. They just about have to be right on time and you must be in the right moment to make it happen. Just like what Chris P. showed in the video of the UFC knock outs those are some points being struck. Behind the ear ( you see that a lot with kicks and punches) and solar pelexus are two number one spot to strike but the ones on the foot, under the eye, on the hands, arms, left pec, under the arms, on the traps, on your back, and where ever else are harder to find and some people just really do have a higher since for pain. I did talk with the guy in the video you posted and yet he said the samething. You do see them in UFC competition but rarely do you see them chain linking the pressure points.  Remember, most of the pressure points are just used for acropuncture (forgive me if misspelled.)




Punching someone hard behind the ear in the temple and on the jaw might knock someone out. Poking them won't.


----------



## K-man (Mar 1, 2014)

wingchun100 said:


> That wasn't the OP's question. He asked if it was realistic for an underweight man to protect himself, and I gave my opinion.


And I happen to agree with you, but for a different reason. 'Dirty tricks' are part and parcel of my training. I teach them as mainstream, but they are not something you can rely on to win a fight by themselves. You need to know how to enter, how to evade, how to get away as well as how to strike effectively etc.  In tournaments I have seen small guys out point big guys on many occasions but that was nothing to do with size. They were just really good fighters.  
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 1, 2014)

If you are small and have to fight what else are you going to do?

Look it is doable. But it is not really the issue.

Get as strong as you can. Get as well trained as you can and you will have more of a chance in a fight. And that is about as good as anyone can hope for.

But just for some inspiration. Here is a chick manhandling a marine.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qbjf0N1LS-8


----------



## K-man (Mar 1, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Punching someone hard behind the ear in the temple and on the jaw might knock someone out. Poking them won't.


True, but vital points are attacked in different ways. The ones you mention are meant to be hit, not poked. They also need to be hit at the right angle. The benefit is if you hit the right place you don't have to hit as hard. Like in *wingchun100*'s comment on dirty tricks, vital points are in the same category. They can enhance your effectiveness but they don't replace your ability to fight effectively.
;asian:


----------



## K-man (Mar 1, 2014)

drop bear said:


> If you are small and have to fight what else are you going to do?
> 
> Look it is doable. But it is not really the issue.
> 
> ...


Mmm! A sporting contest with rules. Do you think she would have beaten him on the street? 

What else are you going to do? Well for a start there is aggression. You see it a lot where it is called 'small man' syndrome. Although that is meant to be a derogatory term in fact it is quite an accurate one. If a small person can harness his aggression, often that alone can be sufficient to turn the tables. How many times do you see a smaller dog get the better of a larger one? Hence the saying by Mark Twain &#8212; 'It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.'
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 1, 2014)

K-man said:


> True, but vital points are attacked in different ways. The ones you mention are meant to be hit, not poked. They also need to be hit at the right angle. The benefit is if you hit the right place you don't have to hit as hard. Like in *wingchun100*'s comment on dirty tricks, vital points are in the same category. They can enhance your effectiveness but they don't replace your ability to fight effectively.
> ;asian:




It is a combination of hitting hard hitting the right spot and avoiding getting hit in the process. That is a pretty consistent theme for martial artists.

Bodybuilder getting manhandled.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lPrlas4UwS8


----------



## drop bear (Mar 1, 2014)

K-man said:


> Mmm! A sporting contest with rules. Do you think she would have beaten him on the street?
> 
> What else are you going to do? Well for a start there is aggression. You see it a lot where it is called 'small man' syndrome. Although that is meant to be a derogatory term in fact it is quite an accurate one. If a small person can harness his aggression, often that alone can be sufficient to turn the tables. How many times do you see a smaller dog get the better of a larger one? Hence the saying by Mark Twain &#8212; 'It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.'
> :asian:



She beat him under the conditions she was fighting him. I am not sure what else is supposed to be speculated about that.

Aggression is good but not high percentage when you have to train it into someone. So it falls down to you either have it or you don't. Like either being big or not. But being as well trained and getting as strong as you can is something you can actually do.


----------



## K-man (Mar 1, 2014)

drop bear said:


> She beat him under the conditions she was fighting him. I am not sure what else is supposed to be speculated about that.
> 
> Exactly. But that doesn't address the question I asked.
> 
> Aggression is good but not high percentage when you have to train it into someone. So it falls down to you either have it or you don't. Like either being big or not. But being as well trained and getting as strong as you can is something you can actually do.


Being well trained would be a key. Using positive aggression is another. Being strong is relative. It is important when you are young but how important is strength to a 60 yo smaller guy being attacked by a 30 yo thug? The secret to fighting is to attack your opponent's weakness, not his strength. If you are smaller, older or weaker you have to use your smarts, not your testicles.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 1, 2014)

K-man said:


> Being well trained would be a key. Using positive aggression is another. Being strong is relative. It is important when you are young but how important is strength to a 60 yo smaller guy being attacked by a 30 yo thug? The secret to fighting is to attack your opponent's weakness, not his strength. If you are smaller, older or weaker you have to use your smarts, not your testicles.
> :asian:



Strength is something you can control good training is something you can control. Developing these will give you the best chance defending an attack.

A 72 year old manhandling a robber.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...face-burglar-got-wrong-72-year-old-boxer.html


----------



## K-man (Mar 2, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Strength is something you can control good training is something you can control. Developing these will give you the best chance defending an attack.
> 
> A 72 year old manhandling a robber.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...face-burglar-got-wrong-72-year-old-boxer.html


I would like to think I will be still fit and strong at 72 but if I need to defend myself I won't be relying on strength and nor did this guy. He punched the young fellow twice. It was skill from past training that helped here, not strength or fitness. That and the fact that the young punk was drunk. I would expect that the older guy also channeled his aggression as he would have copped an adrenalin dump when the knife was pulled.

I'm not arguing that strength is not important. Just that in a conflict where one person is bigger than the other, if the smaller person is relying on strength he may well fail. Training would certainly be number one and that would include strategy. All our training is based on the premise that your attacker may be bigger and stronger. If that were not the case there would be no place in MA training for young people, old people, women or guys of smaller stature because they can't expect to out muscle a larger, stronger male opponent.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 2, 2014)

K-man said:


> I would like to think I will be still fit and strong at 72 but if I need to defend myself I won't be relying on strength and nor did this guy. He punched the young fellow twice. It was skill from past training that helped here, not strength or fitness. That and the fact that the young punk was drunk. I would expect that the older guy also channeled his aggression as he would have copped an adrenalin dump when the knife was pulled.
> 
> I'm not arguing that strength is not important. Just that in a conflict where one person is bigger than the other, if the smaller person is relying on strength he may well fail. Training would certainly be number one and that would include strategy. All our training is based on the premise that your attacker may be bigger and stronger. If that were not the case there would be no place in MA training for young people, old people, women or guys of smaller stature because they can't expect to out muscle a larger, stronger male opponent.
> :asian:



The more strength you have the more it will close the gap between you and a bigger person. I have also mentioned good training in pretty much every post I have made here.

There are tactics You can employ  to handle bigger stronger people.  I accept that.

But if you are worried about the stronger person. Don't skirt around the issue. Get stronger and then you have the unfair advantage.


----------



## K-man (Mar 2, 2014)

drop bear said:


> But if you are worried about the stronger person. Don't skirt around the issue. Get stronger and then you have the unfair advantage.


I don't know how old you are but your expectation that a 175cm 60 or 65 year old male working out in the gym could match a young fit 185cm 30 year old is unrealistic. Likewise if you think a 20 year old woman can work out in a gym and match the above male, it just isn't going to happen. They will never have an unfair advantage, but good training can level the playing field. 

And I backed up your point on good training. But it is the good training that gives the smaller person the ability to defend himself, not the strength training.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 2, 2014)

K-man said:


> I don't know how old you are but your expectation that a 175cm 60 or 65 year old male working out in the gym could match a young fit 185cm 30 year old is unrealistic. Likewise if you think a 20 year old woman can work out in a gym and match the above male, it just isn't going to happen. They will never have an unfair advantage, but good training can level the playing field.
> 
> And I backed up your point on good training. But it is the good training that gives the smaller person the ability to defend himself, not the strength training.
> :asian:



You are not trying to match people. Just giving yourself the best chance possible.


----------



## wingchun100 (Mar 3, 2014)

K-man said:


> And I happen to agree with you, but for a different reason. 'Dirty tricks' are part and parcel of my training. I teach them as mainstream, but they are not something you can rely on to win a fight by themselves. You need to know how to enter, how to evade, how to get away as well as how to strike effectively etc.  In tournaments I have seen small guys out point big guys on many occasions but that was nothing to do with size. They were just really good fighters.
> :asian:



Right, but I interpreted the OP's question as meaning, "Can an underweight man defend himself if he had the training?" So I was talking of a smaller person who knew how to enter/evade/get away/strike effectively versus a bigger person who might not. Of course, if you just met this bully on the street, you have no idea what (if any) training they have...but if they have you cornered, then it's a risk you have to take. If they outweigh/outsize/outreach you, and the only way to get out is to fight, then fight dirty!


----------



## K-man (Mar 3, 2014)

wingchun100 said:


> Right, but I interpreted the OP's question as meaning, "Can an underweight man defend himself if he had the training?" So I was talking of a smaller person who knew how to enter/evade/get away/strike effectively versus a bigger person who might not. Of course, if you just met this bully on the street, you have no idea what (if any) training they have...but if they have you cornered, then it's a risk you have to take. If they outweigh/outsize/outreach you, and the only way to get out is to fight, then fight dirty!


I agree with you. All I said was you can't rely on 'dirty' lone and for me 'dirty' is just part of mainstream training. That is a major difference between training for sport and training reality based.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 3, 2014)

K-man said:


> I agree with you. All I said was you can't rely on 'dirty' lone and for me 'dirty' is just part of mainstream training. That is a major difference between training for sport and training reality based.
> :asian:



It shouldn't be though. There should be variations in scenario,ambush counter ambush,use of force. First aid incident reporting,weapons,awarness ,tactical use of the environment. That sort of thing.

Dirty vs sport is such a minimal difference as to be no real difference. There are a few tricks here and there but not enough to effect good basic fundamentals. 

An eye gouge is a jab with your fingers extended.


----------



## K-man (Mar 3, 2014)

drop bear said:


> It shouldn't be though. There should be variations in scenario,ambush counter ambush,use of force. First aid incident reporting,weapons,awarness ,tactical use of the environment. That sort of thing.
> 
> Dirty vs sport is such a minimal difference as to be no real difference. There are a few tricks here and there but not enough to effect good basic fundamentals.
> 
> An eye gouge is a jab with your fingers extended.


I'm not at all sure how your first points of ambush etc come into this discussion but the way you train for sport is totally different to the way you train for self defence. In sport you have rules that prevent certain techniques. So in sport you don't instinctively strike to the eyes, you don't instinctively use the point of your elbow, you don't target the groin, and you don't grab the hair to gain advantage. You don't train to hit the back of the neck or spine and you don't stomp on your opponent to get away. 

But on top of the rules in sport there are unwritten rules that most fighters accept. The main one here is that in a sporting contest you are not trying to severely damage your opponent. In the ring you really aren't trying to take out your opponent's knee. In a reality based scenario, especially against a weapon, I will be trying to destroy his base. Now I'm not saying you can't use those techniques if you are training a sport based style but it is not your primary objective and the saying is "you fight as you train". Our training targets weak points, our training is to make sure your attacker can't chase after you as you try to escape. 

But perhaps the biggest difference is, in sport you are training to engage. In RBSD you are really training not to fight at all. In sport you are penalised if you don't move in to engage. In RBSD an attacker has to breach your defence. There is no way in the world that sport based MAs have more than a passing resemblance to RB MAs. The objective is different and the training is different.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 3, 2014)

K-man said:


> I'm not at all sure how your first points of ambush etc come into this discussion but the way you train for sport is totally different to the way you train for self defence. In sport you have rules that prevent certain techniques. So in sport you don't instinctively strike to the eyes, you don't instinctively use the point of your elbow, you don't target the groin, and you don't grab the hair to gain advantage. You don't train to hit the back of the neck or spine and you don't stomp on your opponent to get away.
> 
> But on top of the rules in sport there are unwritten rules that most fighters accept. The main one here is that in a sporting contest you are not trying to severely damage your opponent. In the ring you really aren't trying to take out your opponent's knee. In a reality based scenario, especially against a weapon, I will be trying to destroy his base. Now I'm not saying you can't use those techniques if you are training a sport based style but it is not your primary objective and the saying is "you fight as you train". Our training targets weak points, our training is to make sure your attacker can't chase after you as you try to escape.
> 
> ...




You mean nobody has suggested that as a tactic yet?

OK one method to give yourself greater advantage against a more physical opponent is to start the fight before he knows it has started.

Especially if you believe a fight only lasts 10 seconds or so. Then it can be all you for that ten seconds. Now this also applies to not training to engage. It can be a terrible mistake to allow the other guy the ambush and to gain that momentum. I am not sure why you would not train that in a self defence martial art.

I am going to suggest training to engage is a vital component in winning fights.


And in some circumstances you are really trying to take out a knee.

(I found this while playing around in another thread. A good example of the use of the oblique kick)

http://fightland.vice.com/fight-school/the-oblique-kick-with-jon-jones


----------



## K-man (Mar 3, 2014)

drop bear said:


> You mean nobody has suggested that as a tactic yet?
> 
> OK one method to give yourself greater advantage against a more physical opponent is to start the fight before he knows it has started.
> 
> ...


An oblique kick is within the rules of sport. It is often used in WC as well as Krav. I would call this example more of a stomp. One kick I teach that is similar is more kicking straight in to the point just above or just below the knee without the prior knee lift. That is with the toes if you are wearing shoes or the ball of the foot if bare foot. For me the stomp is more for the back of the knee as a takedown. But that is not the kick I am saying will take out the knee. I had a quick search on youtube but can't find what I teach. All MAs teach kicks to the knee whether that be back or front. Some teach to attack the side. Muay Thai train the kick I teach but normally they target the thigh.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 3, 2014)

K-man said:


> An oblique kick is within the rules of sport. It is often used in WC as well as Krav. I would call this example more of a stomp. One kick I teach that is similar is more kicking straight in to the point just above or just below the knee without the prior knee lift. That is with the toes if you are wearing shoes or the ball of the foot if bare foot. For me the stomp is more for the back of the knee as a takedown. But that is not the kick I am saying will take out the knee. I had a quick search on youtube but can't find what I teach. All MAs teach kicks to the knee whether that be back or front. Some teach to attack the side. Muay Thai train the kick I teach but normally they target the thigh.
> :asian:




My point is you can target a joint.

You said.

. In the ring you really aren't trying to take out your opponent's knee

And that is incorrect.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 4, 2014)

Instead of having to deal with that cut and paste multi quote from k ma's.

Allrighty.

An assault occurs when you are in fear of you life not when an attack is thrown. A preemptive attack does not have to be a punch and does not have to kill people. The one punch law is a bit different.

You train for an ambush during what is called the interview stage in rsbd. You could also use the term sucker punch. It is complicated and probably off topic.


Training to engage. You need to pick one stance. You only train to engage but don't engage sounds like messy logic. Not disengaging ever also seems limiting. I see the value of keeping momentum up. But it is always good to have more options.

And knee shots are not unsportsmanlike. At the moment. I think the point is that they take out a lot less knees than people think they do.

And the mention of a sporting contest with rules not being applicable does not make sense if you are going to worry about laws in a self defence.


----------



## K-man (Mar 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> My point is you can target a joint.
> 
> You said.
> 
> ...


And there is an enormous difference between targeting the knee and trying to destroy the knee.



drop bear said:


> An assault occurs when you are in fear of you life not when an attack is thrown. A preemptive attack does not have to be a punch and does not have to kill people. The one punch law is a bit different.


Sorry mate, the law has changed. If you want to use that defence in court you had better have a super smart barrister and witnesses to attest that your life was actually in danger. 

Under current law you are unlikely to convince a court that anything other than a physical assault is assault unless there is a weapon.  Perhaps I could recommend a good SD instructor for you.



drop bear said:


> You train for an ambush during what is called the interview stage in rsbd. You could also use the term sucker punch. It is complicated and probably off topic.


Not sure about "rsbd" but I'm happy to take your word for it. Sucker punch is appropriate in the context of ambush because you don't see it coming. But sorry, in my world there is no interview stage in ambush.



drop bear said:


> Training to engage. You need to pick one stance. You only train to engage but don't engage sounds like messy logic. Not disengaging ever also seems limiting. I see the value of keeping momentum up. But it is always good to have more options.


Mmm! You don't have the first clue when it comes to predictive response training obviously.



drop bear said:


> And knee shots are not unsportsmanlike. At the moment. I think the point is that they take out a lot less knees than people think they do.


Knee shots of the sort you showed are, as I said, within the rules of sport. The knee shot I teach is way outside the rules, sorry. 



drop bear said:


> And the mention of a sporting contest with rules not being applicable does not make sense if you are going to worry about laws in a self defence.


Right. I'm sure you are trying to make point here but the logic escapes me. Let me try to understand. In a sporting contest there are rules and the fight is stopped when someone can't defend himself or can't continue. In self defence the laws of the land provide the 'rules'. Under the law there are certain exemptions but now you are not protected by the law if a court determines that you could have avoided the fight. Under the law you can only use 'reasonable' force. If you are pushed in the chest by a woman and you punch her in the face knocking her to the ground you will possibly go to jail for assault, even though she started it. If a thug attacks you with a knife and you take the knife from him and stab him, you will go to jail. Once the threat is removed your further action becomes retaliation and not self defence.

As I said, self defence training is totally different to sport training.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Mar 4, 2014)

K-man said:


> And there is an enormous difference between targeting the knee and trying to destroy the knee.
> 
> 
> Sorry mate, the law has changed. If you want to use that defence in court you had better have a super smart barrister and witnesses to attest that your life was actually in danger.
> ...



So you have destroyed knees? This with a technique that can't be defined and is different to kicking the thing. Kicks to the knee are allowed front side whatever. I really don't see how yours falls outside the rule set.

The king hit laws are specific to someone dying or being  injured and me being intoxicated
http://m.theaustralian.com.au/natio...ws-not-for-kids/story-e6frgczx-1226808030419#

I don't drink and so am not subject to them.

OK the interview is where an attacker is deciding whether to attack you or not that is usually the taunts and the threats to see if he is going to get something for nothing.

Quite often there is opportunity to be ambushed at this stage or to ambush.

I have no idea what predictive response training is. I Googled it and apparently nobody else does either.

And laws are rules. So training to fight under the rule of the law is training to fight under a set of rules. You cannot go from super devastating techniques that cripple people and use of force because you are bouncing from one extreme to another.

And regardless you train under a rule set. Everybody trains with rules.


----------



## K-man (Mar 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> So you have destroyed knees? This with a technique that can't be defined and is different to kicking the thing. Kicks to the knee are allowed front side whatever. I really don't see how yours falls outside the rule set.


And I haven't broken any necks, destroyed spinal columns or gauged eyes either. Your point is?



drop bear said:


> The king hit laws are specific to someone dying or being  injured and me being intoxicated
> http://m.theaustralian.com.au/natio...ws-not-for-kids/story-e6frgczx-1226808030419#
> 
> I don't drink and so am not subject to them.


Sorry you are just plain wrong. What you quoted was not what I was talking about. Your article just excludes children! 


> THE NSW government has ruled out applying its new mandatory minimum sentences to children - the first exemption to its new sentencing regime - as it scrambles to introduce its new alcohol-fuelled violence package by next week. It was unable, however, to answer a series of questions about its mandatory minimum laws, which will apply to a range of offences beyond unprovoked attacks, or "king-hit" crimes.


What I am referring to are violent offenders, so sorry that does include you 



> NSW will introduce a new offence of unlawful assault causing death to cover situations such as the king hit which killed Sydney teenager Thomas Kelly.
> 
> 
> The new law is based on a Western Australian law but will double the maximum penalty to 20 years in jail.
> ...



 As I took pains to point out, self defence training is totally different to training for the ring.



drop bear said:


> OK the interview is where an attacker is deciding whether to attack you or not that is usually the taunts and the threats to see if he is going to get something for nothing.



Hardly an ambush or has the English language changed since I was at school?



drop bear said:


> Quite often there is opportunity to be ambushed at this stage or to ambush.



Yeah right, if you say so. 



drop bear said:


> I have no idea what predictive response training is. I Googled it and apparently nobody else does either.


So if it's not in Google it doesn't exist? Really? Perhaps you could Google Taira bunkai or look at some of Iain Abernethy's material.


drop bear said:


> And laws are rules. So training to fight under the rule of the law is training to fight under a set of rules. You cannot go from super devastating techniques that cripple people and use of force because you are bouncing from one extreme to another.
> 
> And regardless you train under a rule set. Everybody trains with rules.


I thought that is what I said but thank you for reinforcing it.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 4, 2014)

K-man said:


> And I haven't broken any necks, destroyed spinal columns or gauged eyes either. Your point is?
> 
> Sorry you are just plain wrong. What you quoted was not what I was talking about. Your article just excludes children!
> What I am referring to are violent offenders, so sorry that does include you
> ...



Ok alcohol is a component in those laws.
http://m.theaustralian.com.au/natio...datory-jail-term/story-e6frgczx-1226813800693

I don't know why just is. But it personally gives me an out.

Now having never broken a knee. You are suggesting that you have a better technique than john jones? I am not sure how you would know. But see here is the thing. The reason you haven't broken a knee is because you train with rules. Just like me. 


It doesn't matter how you label the attack. I am not married to the word ambush. Use whatever term you like.

But that stage of whatever you call it can be a deciding factor in overcoming a larger oponant. Just stringing out straight punches from nowhere has been a staple of fighting for years and is still very high percentage.

I will Google your thingy.


----------



## stonewall1350 (Mar 22, 2014)

God made men. Sam Colt made 'em equal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## K-man (Mar 22, 2014)

stonewall1350 said:


> God made men. Sam Colt made 'em equal.


... and Uncle Sam puts the survivors in jail.


----------



## stonewall1350 (Mar 22, 2014)

K-man said:


> ... and Uncle Sam puts the survivors in jail.



Only if the survivor was a bad guy...well a bad guy not in Detroit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RTKDCMB (Mar 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> The king hit laws are specific to someone dying or being  injured and me being intoxicated
> http://m.theaustralian.com.au/natio...ws-not-for-kids/story-e6frgczx-1226808030419#
> 
> I don't drink and so am not subject to them.



I don't think it matters if the king hitter is drunk or not, he would probably be in more trouble if he wasn't (because their is no impairment of judgment due to alcohol).


----------



## drop bear (Mar 23, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> I don't think it matters if the king hitter is drunk or not, he would probably be in more trouble if he wasn't (because their is no impairment of judgment due to alcohol).




No it is a weird law. You need to be intoxicated. It has a minimum sentence that is more than if I stab someone.
http://www.areanews.com.au/story/2036969/lawyer-questions-new-king-hit-laws/


----------



## drop bear (Mar 23, 2014)

stonewall1350 said:


> God made men. Sam Colt made 'em equal.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Don't know I have never had to shoot someone. Had to martial arts a few guys in my time.


----------



## stonewall1350 (Mar 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Don't know I have never had to shoot someone. Had to martial arts a few guys in my time.



Me either. I've been in 2 situations that I deescalated, but 1 I did not have a gun and I got lucky. The first I was 18 and returning a cell phone to a person who had lost it. I had 3 guys start walking up to me and all I had was a crappy pocket knife. They even started to surround me (I was a very white boy in an area known to very much dislike white boys). A cop rolled up fortunate for me and they skedadled. No doubt I was about to get mugged or worse.

The other I was on a sprained ankle and I got approached when I left a drug store. Kid came up to me asking me about my medicine and eyeing my crutches. I had a hand in my pocket which he saw and asked and I told him not to worry about it (.380acp). He left, but it turns out he was wanted for breaking into a barber shop. He got picked up by a deputy that I called who I had just seen at lunch. The dumbass was caught on camera and was probably trying snatch drugs from people not even 100 yards from the barber shop he broke into like 3 days before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## K-man (Mar 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> No it is a weird law. You need to be intoxicated. It has a minimum sentence that is more than if I stab someone.
> http://www.areanews.com.au/story/2036969/lawyer-questions-new-king-hit-laws/


Mmm! Not quite right.


> *Under the new laws, minimum and maximum sentences apply to one-punch killers.* Also, judges will be required to dole out sentences of between eight and 25 years to perpetrators under the influence of drugs or alcohol and *offenders who were not would receive a maximum of 20 years non-parole.*


The penalty is higher if you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol but if you are fighting and the guy you are fighting hits his head and is badly injured or worse, you could be holidaying at state expense for some considerable time.
:asian:


----------



## seasoned (Mar 28, 2014)

OP,
It has always been and always will be "where you hit someone". With this in mind, size makes no difference. 

Case in point:
Jogging, bug flies into your eye. Bugs not that BIG, but what a problem it can make.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Mar 28, 2014)

seasoned said:


> OP,
> It has always been and always will be "where you hit someone". With this in mind, size makes no difference.
> 
> Case in point:
> Jogging, bug flies into your eye. Bugs not that BIG, but what a problem it can make.



That's called getting bug eyed.


----------



## cqbspartan (Sep 12, 2014)

Yes you can...definitely...without a doubt...the question is how you approach the situation...what tactics, strategy, and "tools" do you bring with you...you don't have to be the biggest or strongest to inflict immense pain on your attacker...it all depends on what tool you use to injure your opponent and where you focus the strike on his anatomy...

First of all, you do not want to be grappling with a bigger guy...unless grappling is your specialty and you are very, very proficient...even then, good luck...
Better to find a system that focuses on striking and does not rely on brute strength...

Wing Chun is a perfect example...not based on power or strength...based more on quickness, reflexes, and striking to vital targets...
You may want to study Filipino arts & Indonesian Silat arts as well, as they are not based on strength either...
Studying these systems will make you quicker with striking...

One other option is Tim Larkin's system...his seminars are very expensive but what he teaches is brutally effective...

I have been training in dozens of systems for 40+ years and teaching for almost 30...so I have seen and cross-referenced a lot...
I am currently in south Louisiana and Houston area...if ever in the area, let me know if I can help...


----------



## sidekicker 1st (Oct 12, 2014)

I was in an unfortunate position several months ago where I was attacked by someone 2 inches taller and 3.5 stones heavier than me. I was standing at the end of it, he wasn't. Work on the principal we are all made of the same flesh and blood with the same frailties.


----------

