# It doesn't work... Blog Post



## Xue Sheng (Nov 22, 2019)

It doesn't work...


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

My issue with this is that while we can all sing kumbaya and pretend that everything is equal, everything is not equal, and there's a LOT of BS out there.

I recently came across a post on reddit. It was from a woman who had been attacked and sexually assaulted, and she was looking for a martial art to learn that would help protect her. The closest schools to her were a Bjj school and an Aikido dojo. She had read the faqs and literally had no idea what to study because everything was conflicting. Reading through the reddit posts, I could only imagine her level of confusion as a person who had no idea what martial art to take. In the end, I don't know what art she ended up going with, but I shudder to think if she actually ventured into the Aikido dojo thinking that she was going to learn how to protect herself.

Aikido certainly has its uses and plusses. However, if my wife or daughter were looking for a martial art to stop a man from imposing his will on them, it wouldn't be my top choice. Especially if there is a Bjj school in the area. Is that fair to say? I definitely think so, and I think we should be more honest when people less knowledgeable than us seek advice.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> My issue with this is that while we can all sing kumbaya and pretend that everything is equal, everything is not equal, and there's a LOT of BS out there.
> 
> I recently came across a post on reddit. It was from a woman who had been attacked and sexually assaulted, and she was looking for a martial art to learn that would help protect her. The closest schools to her were a Bjj school and an Aikido dojo. She had read the faqs and literally had no idea what to study because everything was conflicting. Reading through the reddit posts, I could only imagine her level of confusion as a person who had no idea what martial art to take. In the end, I don't know what art she ended up going with, but I shudder to think if she actually ventured into the Aikido dojo thinking that she was going to learn how to protect herself.
> 
> Aikido certainly has its uses and plusses. However, if my wife or daughter were looking for a martial art to stop a man from imposing his will on them, it wouldn't be my top choice. Especially if there is a Bjj school in the area. Is that fair to say? I definitely think so, and I think we should be more honest when people less knowledgeable than us seek advice.



Never said everything is equal and never sang Kumbaya...and what if they have no interest in the Martial art of "your" choice. Maybe you missed the part of the blog where I said it won't work, if don't put in the proper work. Please read more carefully in the future


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

Xue Sheng said:


> Never said everything is equal and never sang Kumbaya...and what if they have no interest in the Martial art of "your" choice. Maybe you missed the part of the blog where I said it won't work, if don't put in the proper work. Please read more carefully in the future



Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the thrust of your post that if your art "doesn't work" (or if you believe that your art doesn't work) you're not doing something right? Essentially people who venture into a style, find something wrong with it, and begin to "bash it" are doing so because they simply didn't go deeper into their system of choice. I would counter that some of us have dug deeper into our previous systems and found rather massive glaring holes in the training methodologies being offered.

Which brings us back to the case of this young woman who was seeking a martial art that would protect her from sexual assault. Given your argument, her going into an Aikido dojo would be just fine because eventually she will be able to use her Aikido effectively. However, if we're being honest with ourselves, it could take that woman years if not longer to use Aikido even at a rudimentary level (if ever). She was deciding between Aikido and Bjj, and if those people were honest and serious in that forum, they would have unanimously told her to go to the Bjj school. Unfortunately in the world of martial arts, we try to be politically correct instead of being honest and serious.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> My issue with this is that while we can all sing kumbaya and pretend that everything is equal, everything is not equal, and there's a LOT of BS out there.
> 
> I recently came across a post on reddit. It was from a woman who had been attacked and sexually assaulted, and she was looking for a martial art to learn that would help protect her. The closest schools to her were a Bjj school and an Aikido dojo. She had read the faqs and literally had no idea what to study because everything was conflicting. Reading through the reddit posts, I could only imagine her level of confusion as a person who had no idea what martial art to take. In the end, I don't know what art she ended up going with, but I shudder to think if she actually ventured into the Aikido dojo thinking that she was going to learn how to protect herself.
> 
> Aikido certainly has its uses and plusses. However, if my wife or daughter were looking for a martial art to stop a man from imposing his will on them, it wouldn't be my top choice. Especially if there is a Bjj school in the area. Is that fair to say? I definitely think so, and I think we should be more honest when people less knowledgeable than us seek advice.


in a lot of circumstances they would both be equally useless, if bjj or its disciples ( you) are recommending bbj as effective measure against sexual assaults, with out printing out that's it's application diminishes to next to nothing as the size strength weight advantage of the attacker increases. then it to is badly misreprenting it's self

the best immediate advice after some about avoiding danger is to go weight training to reduce the strength advantage, then worry about ma


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> in a lot of circumstances they would both be equally useless, if bjj or its disciples ( you) are recommending bbj as effective measure against sexual assaults, with out printing out that's it's application diminishes to next to nothing as the size strength weight advantage of the attacker increases. then it to is badly misreprenting it's self



Except in Bjj training you are exposed to opponents who are bigger and stronger than you on a regular basis. For example, if you're a 120 lb woman in a gym full of big guys that you're constantly rolling with, you're going to learn how to deal with those size differences. In other words, if you can triangle choke your 250lb training partner, there's a good chance you can triangle choke some guy trying to impose their will on you in a self defense situation.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Except in Bjj training you are exposed to opponents who are bigger and stronger than you. For example, if you're a 120 lb woman in a gym full of big guys that you're constantly rolling with, you're going to learn how to deal with those size differences. In other words, if you can triangle choke your 250lb training partner, there's a good chance you can triangle choke some guy trying to impose their will on you in a self defense situation.


if your putting a training partner who is 100 lbs heavier and also learning bjj in a choke hold, he is either letting you or he isn't very good at all, that's why they have weight divisions and that before we discuss strengh


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Except in Bjj training you are exposed to opponents who are bigger and stronger than you on a regular basis. For example, if you're a 120 lb woman in a gym full of big guys that you're constantly rolling with, you're going to learn how to deal with those size differences. In other words, if you can triangle choke your 250lb training partner, there's a good chance you can triangle choke some guy trying to impose their will on you in a self defense situation.



Yeah, and....you appear to be trying to argue against a point no one is trying to make. You may want to read the blog post without the bjj chip on your shoulder and see what is actually being said

My only question to you, which your response does not answer, was what if the person "you" want to take BJJ, does not want to take it, or does not like it? Thereby learning no SD at all


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> if your putting a training partner who is 100 lbs heavier and also learning bjj in a choke hold, he is either letting you or he isn't very good at all, that's why they have weight divisions and that before we discuss strengh



Or you're actually putting them in a choke hold. I've seen it happen, and it's happened to me when I rolled against people smaller than myself. And yes, it does tend to happen with beginning students who think they can push through a choke because a small guy or a woman is choking them. However, that only proves the point, because some perp attacking you is more than likely going to attack you just like a new student at a Bjj academy would.

BTW, I have yet to see anyone tap when a choke or a lock is not firmly in place.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

Xue Sheng said:


> Yeah, and....you appear to be trying to argue against a point no one is trying to make. You may want to read the blog post without the bjj chip on your shoulder and see what is actually being said
> 
> My only question to you, which your response does not answer, was what if the person "you" want to take BJJ, does not want to take it, or does not like it? Thereby learning no SD at all



That's on them, and there's no issue there. People take what the want to take. However, if someone is asking for advice we have a responsibility to give them honest answers.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Or you're actually putting them in a choke hold. I've seen it happen, and it's happened to me when I rolled against people smaller than myself. And yes, it does tend to happen with beginning students who think they can push through a choke because a small guy or a woman is choking them. However, that only proves the point, because some perp attacking you is more than likely going to attack you just like a new student at a Bjj academy would.
> 
> BTW, I have yet to see anyone tap when a choke or a lock is not firmly in place.


small guy or small woman, even a small guy is likely bigger and stronger than a small woman 

as it is you seem to be describing out liers, that some woman can do it doesn't mean that you can recommend it as a likely out come, which is what your doing


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> small guy or small woman, even a small guy is likely bigger and stronger than a small woman
> 
> as it is you seem to be describing out liers, that some woman can do it doesn't mean that you can recommend it as a likely out come, which is what your doing



Uh I can definitely recommend it. A female black belt in BJJ isn't someone to mess with, no matter how big you are. Further, that woman has had years of experience sparring and submitting men who outweigh her. In fact, I would go so far as to say that a female in BJJ is better off than a large man in BJJ, because the female is relying more on technical skill than strength.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Uh I can definitely recommend it. A female black belt in BJJ isn't someone to mess with, no matter how big you are. Further, that woman has had years of experience sparring and submitting men who outweigh her. In fact, I would go so far as to say that a female in BJJ is better off than a large man in BJJ, because the female is relying more on technical skill than strength.


I know your recommending it, your a single issue poster, all you ever do is recommend it.

but femail black belts are out liers,

after that your into fantasy, smaller weaker people Don t have an advantage, other wise we would have lots of weak boxers as world champ s yet there they all are lifting heavy weights


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> I know your recommending it, your a single issue poster, all you ever do is recommend it.
> 
> but femail black belts are out liers,
> 
> after that your into fantasy, smaller weaker people have an advantage, other wise we would have lots of weak boxers as world champ s



A woman in Bjj is an outlier period. That really isn't the point. The point is that a woman training in Bjj will get used to fighting and submitting bigger and larger opponents well within their comfort zone. That makes it a rather invaluable self defense tool.

Also yes, a person using skill to perform a technique is better off than a person utilizing strength. Again I experienced this myself when I lost 40lbs while training and had to pretty much relearn how to grapple. I actually went from a top player to a guard player because I couldn't overpower people like I used to.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

Xue Sheng said:


> It doesn't work...


Well said.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> A woman in Bjj is an outlier period. That really isn't the point. The point is that a woman training in Bjj will get used to fighting and submitting bigger and larger opponents well within their comfort zone. That makes it a rather invaluable self defense tool.
> 
> Also yes, a person using skill to perform a technique is better off than a person utilizing strength. Again I experienced this myself when I lost 40lbs while training and had to pretty much relearn how to grapple. I actually went from a top player to a guard player because I couldn't overpower people like I used to.


there's plenty of women do BJJ, they may make up a small % but thats still quite a lot, what an outlier is your insistence that black belt level is attainable to the average girl on the street, or that thats isnt a decade away, which is no used to anybody next week, next month, next year

and loosing 40 lbs doesnt make you weaker, just not as fat, 

as to the rest your as delusion as the most delusion TMA insisting that being small and weak is an advantage, even if you develop reasonable skill your still small and weak and thats a DISADVANTAGE


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> My issue with this is that while we can all sing kumbaya and pretend that everything is equal, everything is not equal, and there's a LOT of BS out there.
> 
> I recently came across a post on reddit. It was from a woman who had been attacked and sexually assaulted, and she was looking for a martial art to learn that would help protect her. The closest schools to her were a Bjj school and an Aikido dojo. She had read the faqs and literally had no idea what to study because everything was conflicting. Reading through the reddit posts, I could only imagine her level of confusion as a person who had no idea what martial art to take. In the end, I don't know what art she ended up going with, but I shudder to think if she actually ventured into the Aikido dojo thinking that she was going to learn how to protect herself.
> 
> Aikido certainly has its uses and plusses. However, if my wife or daughter were looking for a martial art to stop a man from imposing his will on them, it wouldn't be my top choice. Especially if there is a Bjj school in the area. Is that fair to say? I definitely think so, and I think we should be more honest when people less knowledgeable than us seek advice.


A lot depends how the Aikido is trained. There's a lot of "soft" training in Aikido, and I think a certain amount is necessary for learning the feel of the aiki approach. But I think there's too much of it in many schools.

Aikido uses many of the same principles as Judo, BJJ, and wrestling. Unfortunately, many in Aikido don't seem to know some of those shared principles and rely on a portion of the toolset.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the thrust of your post that if your art "doesn't work" (or if you believe that your art doesn't work) you're not doing something right? Essentially people who venture into a style, find something wrong with it, and begin to "bash it" are doing so because they simply didn't go deeper into their system of choice. I would counter that some of us have dug deeper into our previous systems and found rather massive glaring holes in the training methodologies being offered.
> 
> Which brings us back to the case of this young woman who was seeking a martial art that would protect her from sexual assault. Given your argument, her going into an Aikido dojo would be just fine because eventually she will be able to use her Aikido effectively. However, if we're being honest with ourselves, it could take that woman years if not longer to use Aikido even at a rudimentary level (if ever). She was deciding between Aikido and Bjj, and if those people were honest and serious in that forum, they would have unanimously told her to go to the Bjj school. Unfortunately in the world of martial arts, we try to be politically correct instead of being honest and serious.


I thought the thrust of his post was that you need to put in the time working out with folks outside your dojo and outside your art. Then you find out what works, when, and (eventually) why.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> in a lot of circumstances they would both be equally useless, if bjj or its disciples ( you) are recommending bbj as effective measure against sexual assaults, with out printing out that's it's application diminishes to next to nothing as the size strength weight advantage of the attacker increases. then it to is badly misreprenting it's self
> 
> the best immediate advice after some about avoiding danger is to go weight training to reduce the strength advantage, then worry about ma


BJJ does as good a job as I've seen of working around the size/strength disadvantage. Just adding strength isn't much help unless it actually evens the odds or gives you a strength advantage.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> there's plenty of women do BJJ, they may make up a small % but thats still quite a lot, what an outlier is your insistence that black belt level is attainable to the average girl on the street, or that thats isnt a decade away, which is no used to anybody next week, next month, next year



Frankly even getting to Blue Belt in BJJ would be highly beneficial for a woman seeking self defense.



> and loosing 40 lbs doesnt make you weaker, just not as fat,



That 40lbs I lost included muscle, not just fat.



> as to the rest your as delusion as the most delusion TMA insisting that being small and weak is an advantage, even if you develop reasonable skill your still small and weak and thats a DISADVANTAGE



You dont seem to understand what I'm talking about here so I think it's best that we leave it at that.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> BJJ does as good a job as I've seen of working around the size/strength disadvantage. Just adding strength isn't much help unless it actually evens the odds or gives you a strength advantage.


if you add strength it is always going to even the odds against a stronger opponent always

all the arts are based on using technique t increase effective strength, all of them run in to trouble if the guy is significantly stronger than you. Including BJJ. The skill levels require to overcome a significant strength disadvantage exist,,, but not in the vast majority of people who practise an art.

To tell people that any art will reduce their risk of sexual assault with out explain the shortcomings is misleading


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Frankly even getting to Blue Belt in BJJ would be highly beneficial for a woman seeking self defense.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i know exactly what your talking about, your stuck in some martial arts fantasy that being small and weak is an advantage.

theres no reason at all the a big strong person cant develop the same skill levers as a small weak person, in which case they always have the advantage


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> i know exactly what your talking about, your stuck in some martial arts fantasy that being small and weak is an advantage.



Yeah, you clearly don't.



> theres no reason at all the a big strong person cant develop the same skill levers as a small weak person, in which case they always have the advantage



Actually there's plenty of reasons, especially when it comes to grappling. Size and weight always matters, and you can come to rely on that even if you dont realize it. For example, a big person on top simply doesn't have to work as hard to maintain that position as a smaller person. What's more, the bigger person can even get used to resting in that position because they dont need to exert energy to maintain, gravity does the job for them.

The problem with this is what happens when (as in my case) you lose weight or you deal with someone even bigger than you? That can cause you to have to relearn how to do fundamental positions that you've thought you mastered. Again, the smaller person dealt with this from day one, so they're better off than the bigger person.

Now the part wher you seem to be getting confused is me saying the person is "better off". I'm not negating the size and strength advantage, nor am I saying that a bigger person can't obtain a high level of skill. What I'm saying is that BECAUSE of the advantage that size and strength gives to a practitioner, you can easily fall into bad habits. A smaller person will never fall into those habits because they're working from a disadvantage from the start.

If you dont understand that, I really can't help you further.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, you clearly don't.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


so smaller people don't fall into bad habits, and big people do  So why isnt the heavy weight champ 150 lbs ?

lots of people don't train properly, that doesn't at all support your smaller and weaker is better philosophy

if being big isnt an advantage why did loosing weight make you rubbish, the only answer can be that the instruction at your school is poor or you hadnt been applying yourself


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> so smaller people don't fall into bad habits, and big people do  So why isnt the heavy weight champ 150 lbs ?
> 
> lots of people don't train properly, that doesn't at all support your smaller and weaker is better philosophy



Again, if you're smaller and not using proper technique in Bjj, you're not escaping, you're not tapping anyone, your guard is getting smashed, etc. Bigger people can simply afford to be a bit more sloppy and inefficient.



> if being big isnt an advantage why did loosing weight make you rubbish, the only answer can be that the instruction at your school is poor or you hadnt been applying yourself



This just shows that you're not paying attention. Nowhere did I say that being bigger isn't an advantage. I'm saying that having that advantage can be a detriment to your training.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Again, if you're smaller and not using proper technique in Bjj, you're not escaping, you're not tapping anyone, your guard is getting smashed, etc. Bigger people can simply afford to be a bit more sloppy and inefficient.
> 
> 
> 
> This just shows that you're not paying attention. Nowhere did I say that being bigger isn't an advantage. I'm saying that having that advantage can be a detriment to your training.



//// so having an advantage is detrimental ?

that seem a logical statment ???????????

So back to the case in point, a large male attacker on a small woman has
a) a significant advantage
b) a significant disadvantage

it has to be one or the other

when you decided we can exsplore the point, at the moment your just flip flopping in and out of fantasy land


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the thrust of your post that if your art "doesn't work" (or if you believe that your art doesn't work) you're not doing something right? Essentially people who venture into a style, find something wrong with it, and begin to "bash it" are doing so because they simply didn't go deeper into their system of choice. I would counter that some of us have dug deeper into our previous systems and found rather massive glaring holes in the training methodologies being offered.
> 
> Which brings us back to the case of this young woman who was seeking a martial art that would protect her from sexual assault. Given your argument, her going into an Aikido dojo would be just fine because eventually she will be able to use her Aikido effectively. However, if we're being honest with ourselves, it could take that woman years if not longer to use Aikido even at a rudimentary level (if ever). She was deciding between Aikido and Bjj, and if those people were honest and serious in that forum, they would have unanimously told her to go to the Bjj school. Unfortunately in the world of martial arts, we try to be politically correct instead of being honest and serious.



And correct me if I'm wrong, I have asked you the same question in 2 posts and you have yet to answer.....interesting...but then if memory serves, that was your MO

And actually that is a scenario you added to make an argument against something that was not being said. You do not understand the point, that's fine, you want to argue that's ok too, but you will not be arguing with me. You are missing the point of the blog completely so you can style bash and argue, that is your only reason for being here. And you are fitting the last paragraph of the blog post rather well....respond if you want, argue if you like, I will not be responding to you, I mistook you for another poster and could not understand why you were on ignore since the poster I was thinking about will argue, but also discuss and is rather reasonable and knowledgeable..... I have no idea what MT alerted me of your response in the first place..... but now I remember and I know who you are and why you were on my ignore, my mistake for taking you off... so back on you go...and you are a member of an elite group of 3 on the list.... congratulations....have a nice day


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> //// so having an advantage is detrimental ?
> 
> that seem a logical statment ???????????
> 
> ...



Yeah, I wasn't talking about that at all. I was talking about people taking Bjj or some other form of submission grappling. Obviously the large male attacker has a significant advantage over a small woman. MY point was that in training a martial art like Bjj, a dedicated smaller person is better off than a dedicated larger person because that smaller person has to rely almost completely on technical skill.



> when you decided we can exsplore the point, at the moment your just flip flopping in and out of fantasy land



What?


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

Xue Sheng said:


> And correct me if I'm wrong, I have asked you the same question in 2 posts and you have yet to answer.....interesting...but then if memory serves, that was your MO



Uh, I answered it back in post #10.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I thought the thrust of his post was that you need to put in the time working out with folks outside your dojo and outside your art. Then you find out what works, when, and (eventually) why.



*My *impression is that he was talking about people who become disillusioned in a style and believe that the style in question "doesn't work". Obviously there's many ways a style can "work", but I think we enter questionable territory when we pretend that everything is equal and that the only thing missing is some exploration. Some systems simply have bad training methodologies that are further watered down by American consumerism and entitlement culture. Pretending that everything is equal leads to situations like the one I described where a woman searching for self defense advice ends up being utterly confused and gets generally bad advice when the answer is fairly obvious.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> BTW, I have yet to see anyone tap when a choke or a lock is not firmly in place.


I highly highly doubt this. Ive seen beginner students tap to knee on belly or too much pressure before. I've seen beginners tap to a choke that wasnt locked in/wouldn't have worked, but caused enough pain they thought it would.

And I've also seen, at multiple dojos, in both sambo and bjj, tap to heel hooks/ankle locks before their in place, because they either get scared of ankle locks, or they don't think the person doing them is going slow enough.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, I wasn't talking about that at all. I was talking about people taking Bjj or some other form of submission grappling. Obviously the large male attacker has a significant advantage over a small woman. MY point was that in training a martial art like Bjj, a dedicated smaller person is better off than a dedicated larger person because that smaller person has to rely almost completely on technical skill.
> 
> 
> 
> What?


how can they be BETTER off, when the dedicated larger person will beat off more attackers than the dedicated smaller person

or is your point that 150lb woman will kick more **** than a similarly dedicated 250lb male

in the context of our discussion on sexual assault against women your point is just bogus


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I highly highly doubt this. Ive seen beginner students tap to knee on belly or too much pressure before. I've seen beginners tap to a choke that wasnt locked in/wouldn't have worked, but caused enough pain they thought it would.
> 
> And I've also seen, at multiple dojos, in both sambo and bjj, tap to heel hooks/ankle locks before their in place, because they either get scared of ankle locks, or they don't think the person doing them is going slow enough.



Fair point. I've definitely tapped to leg lock attempts before they were fully locked in because the damage to my knee or ankle wasn't worth me fighting against it. I've also tapped to painful chokeholds than chokeholds that were going to knock me out.

My point was that I've never seen a person tap just for the heck of it.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> how can they be BETTER off, when the dedicated larger person will beat off more attackers than the dedicated smaller person



I've already discussed this multiple times.



> or is your point that 150lb woman will kick more **** than a similarly dedicated 250lb male



Wow.

That's not even close to my point at all.



> in the context of our discussion on sexual assault against women your point is just bogus



I'm not surprised that this is your view given your complete inability to grasp the point.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Fair point. I've definitely tapped to leg lock attempts before they were fully locked in because the damage to my knee or ankle wasn't worth me fighting against it. I've also tapped to painful chokeholds than chokeholds that were going to knock me out.
> 
> My point was that I've never seen a person tap just for the heck of it.


Just to clarify, reading over my post it kind of sounded like a dig at people who tap early. It wasnt-id much rather tap to a weird heel hook thats half in then mess up my foot. I've also tapped to neck cranks on days where my back/neck is bothering me more than normal.

The point that I'm making, though, is even if there's a reason for the tap, the person who is doing it doesn't always know that (and some don't appreciate it/believe it if you tell them). So let's say i go around doing ankle locks, and that becomes my specialty. Cause in my dojo everyone taps rather than risk their ankle. Which is fine. But now I've never actually set it, and I might be messing something up. So I get in a fight somewhere and I go for my ankle lock. Rather than something else that could have worked better had I not been awesome in ankle locks. And all of a sudden it doesn't work, and I'm on the floor trying to do something while the guy turns around and chokes me out or knocks me out ir whatever before I realize what the hell just happened.

And that sounds extreme, but considering how people react to ankle locks, I could totally see this happening. I've seen plenty of people who think they can do ankle locks that, when told to do it slowly aren't able to get it. And this is in a fairly objectively good style, where there's an assumption that everything is pressure tested.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Just to clarify, reading over my post it kind of sounded like a dig at people who tap early. It wasnt-id much rather tap to a weird heel hook thats half in then mess up my foot. I've also tapped to neck cranks on days where my back/neck is bothering me more than normal.
> 
> The point that I'm making, though, is even if there's a reason for the tap, the person who is doing it doesn't always know that (and some don't appreciate it/believe it if you tell them). So let's say i go around doing ankle locks, and that becomes my specialty. Cause in my dojo everyone taps rather than risk their ankle. Which is fine. But now I've never actually set it, and I might be messing something up. So I get in a fight somewhere and I go for my ankle lock. Rather than something else that could have worked better had I not been awesome in ankle locks. And all of a sudden it doesn't work, and I'm on the floor trying to do something while the guy turns around and chokes me out or knocks me out ir whatever before I realize what the hell just happened.
> 
> And that sounds extreme, but considering how people react to ankle locks, I could totally see this happening. I've seen plenty of people who think they can do ankle locks that, when told to do it slowly aren't able to get it. And this is in a fairly objectively good style, where there's an assumption that everything is pressure tested.


I remembered while writing this, but I actually went to a sort of "extracurricular" class a couple months ago where we spent a little over an hour just doing leg/ankle/heel stuff because so many people seem to neglect them in BJJ (possibly because of the fear mentioned above). I still suck at them.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I've already discussed this multiple times.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


your not making A point, your making multiple contradictory points

Try and compose your thoughts before posting

so tell me again, how this small woman will resist attacks because she is small and weak and how if she was stronger it would be a huge disadvantage to her


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I remembered while writing this, but I actually went to a sort of "extracurricular" class a couple months ago where we spent a little over an hour just doing leg/ankle/heel stuff because so many people seem to neglect them in BJJ (possibly because of the fear mentioned above). I still suck at them.



I can't really knock anyone choosing to tap early to leglocks. You are correct that the symptom of tapping early to avoid joint damage to the leg can lead to people not actually being able to perform the technique correctly. However, that tends to be an issue isolated to leglocks. While I'm guilty of tapping early to leglocks, I dont with shoulder, arm, and wrist locks. I also don't tap early for chokes. In fact, it could be argued that i dont tap soon enough.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> so tell me again, how this small woman will resist attacks because she is small and weak and how if she was stronger it would be a huge disadvantage to her



For the last time; Relying on skill and technique is better than relying on size and strength.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I can't really knock anyone choosing to tap early to leglocks. You are correct that the symptom of tapping early to avoid joint damage to the leg can lead to people not actually being able to perform the technique correctly. However, that tends to be an issue isolated to leglocks. While I'm guilty of tapping early to leglocks, I dont with shoulder, arm, and wrist locks. I also don't tap early for chokes. In fact, it could be argued that i dont tap soon enough.


You don't, but some people do. I don't think I've seen it happen with upper body locks, but have seen people who tap early for chokes, when they don't need to. 

Also, when I trained in sambo, they spent more time learning how to control leg locks to make them both accurate and safe then in BJJ. I don't know if that's isolated to the sambo school that I went to, but i've been to probably around 4 BJJ schools and none of them had that much focus on teaching leg locks safely. As a result they're either not done much, or done incorrectly.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> You don't, but some people do. I don't think I've seen it happen with upper body locks, but have seen people who tap early for chokes, when they don't need to.



I have tapped to chokes that are painful instead of actually cutting off air or blood. However, I feel that tapping to pain really doesn't cheat the person doing the submission like tapping early to leglocks do. 



> Also, when I trained in sambo, they spent more time learning how to control leg locks to make them both accurate and safe then in BJJ. I don't know if that's isolated to the sambo school that I went to, but i've been to probably around 4 BJJ schools and none of them had that much focus on teaching leg locks safely. As a result they're either not done much, or done incorrectly.



Some BJJ schools are learning leglocks from DVDs because their instructor didn't learn it properly, and students are demanding to learn them. So yeah, I'm not surprised that the Sambo guys look better doing them.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> For the last time; Relying on skill and technique is better than relying on size and strength.


its clearly not better if your very big and strong is it. ? 

But back to this small weak woman who you claim has an advantage over similarly dedicated big strong BJJers.

how does this advantage manifest its self,


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I have tapped to chokes that are painful instead of actually cutting off air or blood. However, I feel that tapping to pain really doesn't cheat the person doing the submission like tapping early to leglocks do.



I think it depends on how much pain is requiring you to tap. If it's uncomfortable but probably something you can work through, then it probably wouldn't work against an actual person with adrenaline running. If it's blinding pain, that's preventing you from doing anything else, that's another story.





> Some BJJ schools are learning leglocks from DVDs because their instructor didn't learn it properly, and students are demanding to learn them. So yeah, I'm not surprised that the Sambo guys look better doing them.


Seriously? Are the students aware of this? Cause I haven't heard of it. If that's something that instructors are doing in secret, that is a huge problem.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> its clearly not better if your very big and strong is it. ?



Actually it is, because it can make you sloppy and miss technical details that a more skilled person can exploit. Also there's times where you can't power your way out of something.



> But back to this small weak woman who you claim has an advantage over similarly dedicated big strong BJJers.
> 
> how does this advantage manifest its self,



The small weak woman (person) is getting more benefit from training than the bigger, stronger player. That size and strength can become a crutch.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I think it depends on how much pain is requiring you to tap. If it's uncomfortable but probably something you can work through, then it probably wouldn't work against an actual person with adrenaline running. If it's blinding pain, that's preventing you from doing anything else, that's another story.



Definitely the latter. If I can work through it I'll keep fighting. However, if it's agonizing pain and I can't get out of it, I think that's a fair thing to tap to.



> Seriously? Are the students aware of this? Cause I haven't heard of it. If that's something that instructors are doing in secret, that is a huge problem.



Its pretty rampant actually, especially in academies that traditionally frowned on leg locking (hint hint). Do the students know? Good question. I'm not sure they would care as long as they're "learning" it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> if you add strength it is always going to even the odds against a stronger opponent always


It is always going to *reduce the advantage of* a stronger opponent. It won't even the odds unless you reach their strength level.



> all the arts are based on using technique t increase effective strength, all of them run in to trouble if the guy is significantly stronger than you. Including BJJ. The skill levels require to overcome a significant strength disadvantage exist,,, but not in the vast majority of people who practise an art.
> 
> To tell people that any art will reduce their risk of sexual assault with out explain the shortcomings is misleading


Some approaches reduce the advantage strength provides, so the required skill differential to offset the strength is also reduced.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> //// so having an advantage is detrimental ?
> 
> that seem a logical statment ???????????
> 
> ...


You're confusing "attacker" with "person learning an art". A goes for one. B is for the other.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> *My *impression is that he was talking about people who become disillusioned in a style and believe that the style in question "doesn't work". Obviously there's many ways a style can "work", but I think we enter questionable territory when we pretend that everything is equal and that the only thing missing is some exploration. Some systems simply have bad training methodologies that are further watered down by American consumerism and entitlement culture. Pretending that everything is equal leads to situations like the one I described where a woman searching for self defense advice ends up being utterly confused and gets generally bad advice when the answer is fairly obvious.


I've never heard anyone on MT or any other forum claim that all systems are equal. That's a strawman argument I've seen quite frequently.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I highly highly doubt this. Ive seen beginner students tap to knee on belly or too much pressure before. I've seen beginners tap to a choke that wasnt locked in/wouldn't have worked, but caused enough pain they thought it would.
> 
> And I've also seen, at multiple dojos, in both sambo and bjj, tap to heel hooks/ankle locks before their in place, because they either get scared of ankle locks, or they don't think the person doing them is going slow enough.


Yeah, I've tapped out a time or two when I thought the person wasn't being controlled, and didn't want to wait and see if they'd stop the technique early enough. I'd expect that to happen from time to time in any place that uses locks and submissions.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Its pretty rampant actually, especially in academies that traditionally frowned on leg locking (hint hint). Do the students know? Good question. I'm not sure they would care as long as they're "learning" it.


But this brings it full circle. If they're "learning" it, not actually pressure testing it, and learning it from someone who learned it from a video, is that fair? Should new students be informed of this before they come in? Is that any better than someone thinking their wrist locks are going to work because their instructor said so, but the instructor learned them improperly and never pressure tests anything?

At the very least, in the second style, it's more obvious that they're not pressure testing it if they're not pressure testing anything. In BJJ it's more hidden since everything else is being pressure tested and it _seems_ like leglocks are as well.

Also your rating is from this part "academies that traditionally frowned on leg locking (hint hint)". That made me chuckle.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, I've tapped out a time or two when I thought the person wasn't being controlled, and didn't want to wait and see if they'd stop the technique early enough. I'd expect that to happen from time to time in any place that uses locks and submissions.


Which in itself isn't bad, as long as the person knows that's why you tapped. But that's not always the case. And the other replies from hanzou have enlightened me to an issue that I didn't realize was as big as it might be in BJJ.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You're confusing "attacker" with "person learning an art". A goes for one. B is for the other.


so which one is which ?, it seem clear that a) is an advantage for both

but we are discussing someone learning in order to defend themselves, so they are the same thing


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> so which one is which ?, it seem clear that a) is an advantage for both
> 
> but we are discussing someone learning in order to defend themselves, so they are the same thing



The point is that a woman seeking self defense would be better off going to the Bjj academy than the Aikido dojo. A woman seeking to learn more about Japanese culture and moving meditation would be better off at the Aikido dojo.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> It is always going to *reduce the advantage of* a stronger opponent. It won't even the odds unless you reach their strength level.
> 
> 
> Some approaches reduce the advantage strength provides, so the required skill differential to offset the strength is also reduced.


evening the odds means making them closer to even. not making them identical


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> The point is that a woman seeking self defense would be better off going to the Bjj academy than the Aikido dojo. A woman seeking to learn more about Japanese culture and moving meditation would be better off at the Aikido dojo.


how are you quantifying that ? if she ends up raped and beaten, then she may as well have have  either or non at all, the outcome is exactly the same

So go on .. quantify it


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> The point is that a woman seeking self defense would be better off going to the Bjj academy than the Aikido dojo. A woman seeking to learn more about Japanese culture and moving meditation would be better off at the Aikido dojo.


In most cases, true in both parts.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> It is always going to *reduce the advantage of* a stronger opponent. It won't even the odds unless you reach their strength level.
> 
> 
> Some approaches reduce the advantage strength provides, so the required skill differential to offset the strength is also reduced.


all approaches are dependent on techniques that give you a mechanic advantage, so reducing the strength you need for them to be effective. ALL OF THEM.

the greater the strength deficiete, the more mechanical advantage you need, therefore the greater the skill required, not as you say, lessor skill levels


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> evening the odds means making them closer to even. not making them identical


That’s not the usage I’m used to. Might be a dialectical difference.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> all approaches are dependent on techniques that give you a mechanic advantage, so reducing the strength you need for them to be effective. ALL OF THEM.
> 
> the greater the strength deficiete, the more mechanical advantage you need, therefore the greater the skill required, not as you say, lessor skill levels


You don’t seem to be actually making a point any longer.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Actually it is, because it can make you sloppy and miss technical details that a more skilled person can exploit. Also there's times where you can't power your way out of something.
> 
> 
> 
> The small weak woman (person) is getting more benefit from training than the bigger, stronger player. That size and strength can become a crutch.


if she cant defend her self she is getting no benefit at all from the training or at least no more benefit than she get from step aerobics or aikido


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You don’t seem to be actually making a point any longer.


im pointing out your errors


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> if she cant defend her self she is getting no benefit at all from the training or at least no more benefit than she get from step aerobics or aikido


Going to try something here. I'll assume you are correct, and no matter how skilled she gets at fighting, she will have a disadvantage against someone stronger without experience. I don't think that's the case, but i'll go with it.

So let's take three instances. 

Instance A: She has no experience whatsoever, in fighting or martial arts, weighs 130 and is attacked by a guy weighing around 200. She probably has about a 1% chance (maybe less) of winning, considering she doesn't know how to react and the guy was prepared. so 99% chance she gets mugged/beat up/raped/killed/kidnapped/whatever. 

Instance B: She has no experience whatsoever, in fighting or martial arts, but does do aerobics and/or a martial art at a place that does no practical application. She weighs 130 and is attacked by a guy weighing around 200. She probably has about the same 1% (or less) chance of winning, considering she still doesn't know how to react and the guy was prepared. so 99% chance she gets mugged/beat up/raped/killed/kidnapped/whatever. 

Instance C: same lady now has about 10 years of experience in BJJ (likely crosstrained some striking at some point from my experience with BJJers, but that's irrelevant). She still weighs 130, and is attacked by the same guy weighing around 200. She still has a disadvantage, but knows something that she can do to protect herself. Now she has a 5% chance of reacting and using her skills to sub the guy and escape, 95% chance of all that other stuff. I feel like I'm lowballing her chances, but that's also irrelevant. Even if it went to a 2% chance it would be irrelevant.

In the third instance, the person has a better chance of winning/surviving/whatever, even if it is still extremely low. So that increased chance is the benefit.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Going to try something here. I'll assume you are correct, and no matter how skilled she gets at fighting, she will have a disadvantage against someone stronger without experience. I don't think that's the case, but i'll go with it.
> 
> So let's take three instances.
> 
> ...


but you cant do that with out a base line,

so how many women with no training escape, she doesn't have to win, just get away ,some what high than the 1% you claim i suspect, but there your figures so il leave you to do the research

then you need to find how many women with 10 years BJJ escape. then you have answer

all your doing is plucking random figures from the air and making a case that supports your view

But it still begs the question, what happens if she is attacked after 18 months

NB we are discussing sexual assault not muggings, their easy just give up your purse


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> how are you quantifying that ? if she ends up raped and beaten, then she may as well have have  either or non at all, the outcome is exactly the same
> 
> So go on .. quantify it



There's always a chance she will get raped or beaten no matter what she knows. However, if she's trained how to stop that method of attack, her chances of escaping that encounter without getting raped or beaten increases dramatically. Bjj excels at fighting from your weakest position (your back), so if a woman is surprised and knocked to the ground with an attacker on top of her and she has 10 years of Bjj experience (@kempodisciple example, putting her at or near black belt range), are we really going to pretend like she has absolutely no idea what to do?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> but you cant do that with out a base line,
> 
> so how many women with no training escape, she doesn't have to win, just get away ,some what high than the 1% you claim i suspect, but there your figures so il leave you to do the research
> 
> ...


You're right, they were random numbers to try and help explain the point. The point is that it doesn't really matter what the numbers are. If it improves the odds even slightly, then that is the benefit. And I'm not really sure how you can claim that learning how to fight doesn't improve the odds of winning a fight (at least) slightly more than not learning how to fight.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> There's always a chance she will get raped or beaten no matter what she knows. However, if she's trained how to stop that method of attack, her chances of escaping that encounter without getting raped or beaten increases dramatically. Bjj excels at fighting from your weakest position (your back), so if a woman is surprised and knocked to the ground with an attacker on top of her and she has 10 years of Bjj experience (@kempodisciple example, putting her at or near black belt range), are we really going to pretend like she has absolutely no idea what to do?


i don't mean to labour the point, but quantify means supply quantities. ''dramatically'' is not a quantity  just a somewhat vague opinion


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> but you cant do that with out a base line,
> 
> so how many women with no training escape, she doesn't have to win, just get away ,some what high than the 1% you claim i suspect, but there your figures so il leave you to do the research
> 
> ...


So, the point is just give up?


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> So, the point is just give up?


the guys attacking aikido for making unsubstantiated claims and making equally unsubstantiated claims for bjj

no the point is be realistic


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> You're right, they were random numbers to try and help explain the point. The point is that it doesn't really matter what the numbers are. If it improves the odds even slightly, then that is the benefit. And I'm not really sure how you can claim that learning how to fight doesn't improve the odds of winning a fight (at least) slightly more than not learning how to fight.



well does it ?  you either escape or you don't. being closer to escaping, but still not escaping is a failure,


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> the guys attacking aikido for making unsubstantiated claims and making equally unsubstantiated claims for bjj
> 
> no the point is be realistic



It isn't an unsubstantiated claim though. You fight like you train and Bjj offers full contact training from a position of weakness on a consistent basis. The idea that someone who trains that way for a decent amount of time would be unable to utilize that training in a self defense situation is laughable.

As for Aikido, many Aikidoka would freely admit that most of the art has gone full hippie, losing a lot of the edge it had in its earlier days. There's definitely hard Aikido out there, but you're hard pressed to find it.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> It isn't an unsubstantiated claim though. You fight like you train and Bjj offers full contact training from a position of weakness on a consistent basis. The idea that someone who trains that way for a decent amount of time would be unable to utilize that training in a self defense situation is laughable.
> 
> As for Aikido, many Aikidoka would freely admit that most of the art has gone full hippie, losing a lot of the edge it had in its earlier days. There's definitely hard Aikido out there, but you're hard pressed to find it.


more unsubstantiated opinions

of course they can use it in self defence, the issue is will it work,

your claim women with a serious size and strength disadvantage can make it work, after some unspecified amount of time

thats what im asking you to quantify, you have data obviously


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> more unsubstantiated opinions
> 
> of course they can use it in self defence, the issue is will it work,
> 
> ...



Again, if a woman can escape from under a mount, sweep a bigger man while in guard, and choke out a man in training when the man is imposing his will on her, why can't she do any of that in a self defense situation? This is common sense bro.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> well does it ?  you either escape or you don't. being closer to escaping, but still not escaping is a failure,


It's the likelihood of escaping. If you're more likely to escape because you trained, then it's a benefit leading into the fight/attack.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> It's the likelihood of escaping. If you're more likely to escape because you trained, then it's a benefit leading into the fight/attack.


yes if your more likely to, so how much more likely is some woman to escape if she has trained BJJ, which is the same question i asked you before and you just starting making up numbers


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Again, if a woman can escape from under a mount, sweep a bigger man while in guard, and choke out a man in training when the man is imposing his will on her, why can't she do any of that in a self defense situation? This is common sense bro.


so no actual data ? just you unsubstantiated opinion that its common sense

if she can do all that against a man that trying she MAY be able to do it in an attack or she may very well not be able to.
so the best you have is IF , BUT and maybe.

that's along way from your original claim


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> yes if your more likely to, so how much more likely is some woman to escape if she has trained BJJ, which is the same question i asked you before and you just starting making up numbers


You actually didn't ask me any questions before I made up numbers. 

And I have no idea how much more likely, but I can pretty confidently say that you are at least more likely to escape if you do train then if you don't.


----------



## jobo (Nov 27, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> You actually didn't ask me any questions before I made up numbers.
> 
> And I have no idea how much more likely, but I can pretty confidently say that you are at least more likely to escape if you do train then if you don't.


what you made up random number with out being asked a question, that impressive

well you may be confident, but in the absence of some unmade up quantities that just supposition, the people who train and escape may have escaped anyway, people with out training escape SO....


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> so no actual data ? just you unsubstantiated opinion that its common sense



Unsubstantiated would mean that I have no evidence to back up what I'm saying. Except I do have evidence. It simply isn't the evidence that YOU want because you know the specific "data" you want doesn't exist.



> if she can do all that against a man that trying she MAY be able to do it in an attack or she may very well not be able to.
> so the best you have is IF , BUT and maybe.
> 
> that's along way from your original claim



My original claim was the Bjj was better for self defense than Aikido. How is that a long way from that original claim?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 28, 2019)

jobo said:


> the guys attacking aikido for making unsubstantiated claims and making equally unsubstantiated claims for bjj
> 
> no the point is be realistic


BJJ’s results are much easier to see than Aikido’s in most cases. There’s a difference between unsubstantiated and unquantified. You’ve confused those terms in this thread.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 28, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Again, if a woman can escape from under a mount, sweep a bigger man while in guard, and choke out a man in training when the man is imposing his will on her, why can't she do any of that in a self defense situation? This is common sense bro.


The only difference is sheer aggression. We can’t really account for that, but MMA outcomes seem to suggest the skills transfer.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 28, 2019)

jobo said:


> what you made up random number with out being asked a question, that impressive
> 
> well you may be confident, but in the absence of some unmade up quantities that just supposition, the people who train and escape may have escaped anyway, people with out training escape SO....


So just give up?


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 28, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> The only difference is sheer aggression. We can’t really account for that, but MMA outcomes seem to suggest the skills transfer.



Agreed, which is sadly why a lot of women don't stick with Bjj very long. Not only do they have to deal with big hairy sweaty men on top of them, but it forces them to fight harder than their male counterparts.

And yeah, MMA definitely shows that the skills transfer over. I just saw a vid of Garry Tonon doing a leg lock entry and submission in a MMA fight exactly like he did in BJJ training and videos. It was textbook level.


----------



## jobo (Nov 28, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> BJJ’s results are much easier to see than Aikido’s in most cases. There’s a difference between unsubstantiated and unquantified. You’ve confused those terms in this thread.


NO im really not, 

one of the ways he could substantiate it is to provide quantification, there may be others, I can't think of any, but its his job to provide substance to his claims, not mine to second guess him


----------



## jobo (Nov 28, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> So just give up?


thats the second time youve asked me that.

its up to the people who participate if they should give up.

If the rational to continue is they think they can resist attacks then they need to ask them selves some hard questions about the feasibility of what they learn ever actually working

its the same fundemental issue with males, but even more polarised with small femails..

can the skills you learn over come a significant physical disadvantage, if your not at a physical disadvantage then you probably wont need the skills anyway. the fact you are better equipped to resist attack, which the claim being made, doesn't matter tuppence if you don't ''WIN''

byway of an illustrative anecdote, there a young lady at my group, who has the physical proportions of a large sized doll.

it doesn't matter what she trains, for how long, she will never ever fight off an average sized male, Ok she is an outlier, but there's an awful lot of people between her and an ability to defend themselves adequately .

the same of course goes for a lot of males studying ma, if they believe there skill levels will over come a significant physical disadvantage they are either exceptionally talented or delusional


----------



## JP3 (Nov 28, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the thrust of your post that if your art "doesn't work" (or if you believe that your art doesn't work) you're not doing something right? Essentially people who venture into a style, find something wrong with it, and begin to "bash it" are doing so because they simply didn't go deeper into their system of choice. I would counter that some of us have dug deeper into our previous systems and found rather massive glaring holes in the training methodologies being offered.
> 
> Which brings us back to the case of this young woman who was seeking a martial art that would protect her from sexual assault. Given your argument, her going into an Aikido dojo would be just fine because eventually she will be able to use her Aikido effectively. However, if we're being honest with ourselves, it could take that woman years if not longer to use Aikido even at a rudimentary level (if ever). She was deciding between Aikido and Bjj, and if those people were honest and serious in that forum, they would have unanimously told her to go to the Bjj school. Unfortunately in the world of martial arts, we try to be politically correct instead of being honest and serious.


A thought.  "What if" the woman you mentioned, who had a perceived pressing need for actual/practical SD instruction got into the BJJ class and absolutely hated it? I could easily understand that, since the contact involved might get into her head, all that rolling around and grabbing and mashing and etc. So, she quits after a week and it did her no good.

   Being an aikidoer (I love that made up word), I recognize that trying to turn it into something which you can really rely upon in SD situations is a long road. And it hurts (investing in loss, love that term too).  So, if she was after becoming competent enough to at least defend against the larger & stronger opponent "in as short a span of time as possible," then BJJ seems to me to be a better fit than aikido. 

Fastest yet might be to get training in CQB shooting, do someof those competitions, and have both your CCL (CHL?) and your 9mm ready to hand. "Quickest" solution to the problem she presented to the board, perhaps. Not my own solution, since guns scare the bejeezus out of me, but maybe hers?


----------



## jobo (Nov 28, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Unsubstantiated would mean that I have no evidence to back up what I'm saying. Except I do have evidence. It simply isn't the evidence that YOU want because you know the specific "data" you want doesn't exist.
> 
> 
> 
> My original claim was the Bjj was better for self defense than Aikido. How is that a long way from that original claim?


and you expanded that to claim a smal woman could be demolishing big guys in an unspecified amount of time

but your having trouble separating your opinion from facts. its your opinion that SHE would be better doing BJJ, its my opinion that in the vast majority of cases they are both equally useless.

Youve introduced some outlier of female black belts, who can possibly make a reasonable attempt at defending themselves. but they are a minority and therefore not a reasonable indicator of its general application


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 28, 2019)

jobo said:


> and you expanded that to claim a smal woman could be demolishing big guys in an unspecified amount of time



Yeah, I never said that.



> but your having trouble separating your opinion from facts. its your opinion that SHE would be better doing BJJ, its my opinion that in the vast majority of cases they are both equally useless.



I also never said that practicing Aikido would be "useless" for a woman seeking self defense.



> Youve introduced some outlier of female black belts, *who can possibly make a reasonable attempt at defending themselves*. but they are a minority and therefore not a reasonable indicator of its general application



Doesn't that completely contradict your entire argument that training BJJ would be "useless" for female self defense?


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 28, 2019)

JP3 said:


> A thought.  "What if" the woman you mentioned, who had a perceived pressing need for actual/practical SD instruction got into the BJJ class and absolutely hated it? I could easily understand that, since the contact involved might get into her head, all that rolling around and grabbing and mashing and etc. So, she quits after a week and it did her no good.
> 
> Being an aikidoer (I love that made up word), I recognize that trying to turn it into something which you can really rely upon in SD situations is a long road. And it hurts (investing in loss, love that term too).  So, if she was after becoming competent enough to at least defend against the larger & stronger opponent "in as short a span of time as possible," then BJJ seems to me to be a better fit than aikido.
> 
> Fastest yet might be to get training in CQB shooting, do someof those competitions, and have both your CCL (CHL?) and your 9mm ready to hand. "Quickest" solution to the problem she presented to the board, perhaps. Not my own solution, since guns scare the bejeezus out of me, but maybe hers?



No argument there. However, the woman was specifically trying to decide between. a Bjj or an Aikido school.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 28, 2019)

jobo said:


> NO im really not,
> 
> one of the ways he could substantiate it is to provide quantification, there may be others, I can't think of any, but its his job to provide substance to his claims, not mine to second guess him


There are many ways to substantiate claims that don't provide exact (or even numeric) quantification. You've been demanding quantification for a while, so if that's not what you think is necessary, why demand it?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 28, 2019)

jobo said:


> thats the second time youve asked me that.
> 
> its up to the people who participate if they should give up.
> 
> ...


Yeah, no. You're claiming to make a point, and your point appears to be that nothing will help. Hence my translation of your posts.

The fact is that it's possible to increase someone's chances in a number of ways. Most of those ways increase the chances incrementally. Whether that's worth the effort or not is up to the person, but you just keep dismissing the idea that incremental improvement is a benefit.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 29, 2019)

jobo said:


> byway of an illustrative anecdote, there a young lady at my group, who has the physical proportions of a large sized doll.
> 
> it doesn't matter what she trains, for how long, she will never ever fight off an average sized male, Ok she is an outlier, but there's an awful lot of people between her and an ability to defend themselves adequately .



She'd be able to fight off an average sized male if she trained in Bjj.


----------



## Martial D (Nov 29, 2019)

Why is it only ever people that practice 'display styles' that make posts like this?

Food for thought.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 29, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Why is it only ever people that practice 'display styles' that make posts like this?
> 
> Food for thought.



I have to ask, what is a "Display Style"?


----------



## jobo (Nov 29, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, I never said that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ok


gpseymour said:


> Yeah, no. You're claiming to make a point, and your point appears to be that nothing will help. Hence my translation of your posts.
> 
> The fact is that it's possible to increase someone's chances in a number of ways. Most of those ways increase the chances incrementally. Whether that's worth the effort or not is up to the person, but you just keep dismissing the idea that incremental improvement is a benefit.





gpseymour said:


> Yeah, no. You're claiming to make a point, and your point appears to be that nothing will help. Hence my translation of your posts.
> 
> The fact is that it's possible to increase someone's chances in a number of ways. Most of those ways increase the chances incrementally. Whether that's worth the effort or not is up to the person, but you just keep dismissing the idea that incremental improvement is a benefit.


 well no, exercise has benefits, so to say there no benefits would be incorrect, the question then is BJJ or what ever, more beneficial than netball or dancing

in the context of the discussion at hand, small female / sexual assault, its only beneficial if those increments add up to a point where the attack can be repulsed. if that isn't achieved then NO, no benefit


----------



## jobo (Nov 29, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Why is it only ever people that practice 'display styles' that make posts like this?
> 
> Food for thought.


if your talking about me ? i don't do a display style


----------



## Martial D (Nov 29, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I have to ask, what is a "Display Style"?


Ehh.

A style that focuses more on perfecting their dance routine and are judged on aesthetics rather than functional skill.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 29, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Why is it only ever people that practice 'display styles' that make posts like this?
> 
> Food for thought.


Posts like what?


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 29, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Posts like what?



I thought he was talking about the OP.


----------



## Martial D (Nov 29, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Posts like what?


Like the OP.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 29, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Like the OP.



JKD is a display style, Police/Military Sanda (sanshou) is a display style. I did those too. Been in multiple styles and been MA likely longer than you've been on the planet sonny. You might want to try and actually READ the blog post without the attitude and you might learn something.

You know, I'm done.....had enough of all of this....
Congratulations you win

And you are now an addition to my ignore list too.


----------



## Flying Crane (Nov 29, 2019)

Xue Sheng said:


> And you are now an addition to my ignore list too.


You ought to expand your list.  Life is better that way.


----------



## geezer (Nov 29, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> You ought to expand your list.  Life is better that way.


I have absolutely no problem ignoring people, and I don't even have a list. On forums, it's a skill that should be practiced!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 29, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I have to ask, what is a "Display Style"?


Any style can be a "display style".

A punch can be done in 3 different ways". For

1. combat - punch out fast, pull back fast.
2. display - punch out fast, freeze, pull back slow,
3. health - punch out slow, pull back fast.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 29, 2019)

geezer said:


> I have absolutely no problem ignoring people, and I don't even have a list. On forums, it's a skill that should be practiced!


Sometime I don't understand how people can get into other's ignore list.

- When Hanzou asked, "What is display style?" and
- I said "Any style can be a display style".

It doesn't matter whether Hanzou may agree with me or not, how can I get into his ignore list?

- A asks a question.
- B answers to A's question.

That's what the online discussion is for.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 29, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Any style can be a "display style".
> 
> A punch can be done in 3 different ways". For
> 
> ...



Based on @Martial D's definition, I dont think that's the case. I think its more along the line of what happened to Sharrif Bey, the Hung Ga master from NYC who got blasted by some random guy doing sloppy boxing. Bey had some beautiful forms that didn't translate at all to fighting ability.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 29, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Based on @Martial D's definition, I dont think that's the case. I think its more along the line of what happened to Sharrif Bey, the Hung Ga master from NYC who got blasted by some random guy doing sloppy boxing. Bey had some beautiful forms that didn't translate at all to fighting ability.


The problem in MA training is people who train fight by using display method, or health method and don't know the difference.


----------



## JP3 (Nov 30, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> No argument there. However, the woman was specifically trying to decide between. a Bjj or an Aikido school.


If constrained to the question, and "She Must choose One," even being longtime aikiguy myself I'd point her at the BJJ school until she got competent at dealing with larger/stronger people and being able to survive on the ground.

But looking at it from a practical perspective, I just don't think that it "would work out." That's not BJJ's fault, or problem. It's a tough one.

But yeah, initially, for the first couple of years at least, go BJJ.  The learning curve in a BJJ school is much steeper.


----------



## jobo (Nov 30, 2019)

JP3 said:


> If constrained to the question, and "She Must choose One," even being longtime aikiguy myself I'd point her at the BJJ school until she got competent at dealing with larger/stronger people and being able to survive on the ground.
> 
> But looking at it from a practical perspective, I just don't think that it "would work out." That's not BJJ's fault, or problem. It's a tough one.
> 
> But yeah, initially, for the first couple of years at least, go BJJ.  The learning curve in a BJJ school is much steeper.


well yes, it probably wont work out from a practical perspective, because of the bell curve, for every one or two petite females that can learn to mix it with big strong BJJ guys, there's another 8 or 9 that cant. 

That's the problem with using outliers as an example, they are special by definition,
you cant turn round and say anyone can do it. or we would all be running sub ten second 100s


----------



## geezer (Nov 30, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> That's what the online discussion is for.


It’s also For entertainment. That’s why I don’t complain when Jobo goes off on one of his cantankerous tirades. I just make some popcorn or grab some chips. Besides he usually is at least half right, which makes the discussion interesting.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 30, 2019)

geezer said:


> I have absolutely no problem ignoring people, and I don't even have a list. On forums, it's a skill that should be practiced!



Yeah but how do you constantly let them know you are ignoring them?


----------



## drop bear (Nov 30, 2019)

jobo said:


> well yes, it probably wont work out from a practical perspective, because of the bell curve, for every one or two petite females that can learn to mix it with big strong BJJ guys, there's another 8 or 9 that cant.
> 
> That's the problem with using outliers as an example, they are special by definition,
> you cant turn round and say anyone can do it. or we would all be running sub ten second 100s



We don't train for average.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 30, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> The only difference is sheer aggression. We can’t really account for that, but MMA outcomes seem to suggest the skills transfer.



No. Mental toughness, discipline and warrior ethos. These things that translate to sheer aggression. Are developed by training.

They are not some magical side factor.


----------



## jobo (Nov 30, 2019)

drop bear said:


> We don't train for average.


it doesn't matter what you train for you can only reach your potential

and 90% of people have a lower potential than the other 10%


----------



## jobo (Nov 30, 2019)

drop bear said:


> No. Mental toughness, discipline and warrior ethos. These things that translate to sheer aggression. Are developed by training.
> 
> They are not some magical side factor.


I agree you can make people who are not really aggressive very aggressive, I'm not sure that's a good thing for them or society as a whole


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 30, 2019)

jobo said:


> well yes, it probably wont work out from a practical perspective, because of the bell curve, for every one or two petite females that can learn to mix it with big strong BJJ guys, there's another 8 or 9 that cant.
> 
> That's the problem with using outliers as an example, they are special by definition,
> you cant turn round and say anyone can do it. or we would all be running sub ten second 100s



So BJJ is less effective because (in your mind) 90% of females entering BJJ can't handle the training?

Yeah, that makes sense.....


----------



## jobo (Nov 30, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> So BJJ is less effective because (in your mind) 90% of females entering BJJ can't handle the training?
> 
> Yeah, that makes sense.....


I didn't say that


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 30, 2019)

jobo said:


> I didn't say that



You're saying that a practitioner of BJJ won't be able to perform to the art's strengths because they won't last long enough to get good at it.


----------



## jobo (Nov 30, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> You're saying that a practitioner of BJJ won't be able to perform to the art's strengths because they won't last long enough to get good at it.


i didnt say that either


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 30, 2019)

jobo said:


> i didnt say that either



Okay, so then what are you saying?


----------



## jobo (Nov 30, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> Okay, so then what are you saying?


do you want me to copy it down for you, to save you scrolling up,

Start by googling ''bell curve' then it may make more sense to you


----------



## drop bear (Nov 30, 2019)

jobo said:


> I agree you can make people who are not really aggressive very aggressive, I'm not sure that's a good thing for them or society as a whole



Depends on what you consider aggressive. You can train elements that are perceived as aggression and still produce functional people.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 30, 2019)

jobo said:


> it doesn't matter what you train for you can only reach your potential
> 
> and 90% of people have a lower potential than the other 10%



And that ten percent may not be developing theirs so it increases your odds somewhat in a street fight.


----------



## Buka (Nov 30, 2019)

My wife trained BJJ, she was 126 pounds.
Fortunately nobody told her she couldn’t beat men twice her size.

True, she’s an evil, aggressive woman, but still.


----------



## Martial D (Dec 2, 2019)

Buka said:


> My wife trained BJJ, she was 126 pounds.
> Fortunately nobody told her she couldn’t beat men twice her size.
> 
> True, she’s an evil, aggressive woman, but still.


We have a BJJ black belt who also happens to be a 120 pound girl.

I'm a blue belt man that weighs 200 pounds.

I can sometimes stalemate her, but she armbars and chokes the hell out of me on the regs.

BJJ is for real.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 2, 2019)

drop bear said:


> No. Mental toughness, discipline and warrior ethos. These things that translate to sheer aggression. Are developed by training.
> 
> They are not some magical side factor.


I never said anything about them being magical. You're projecting what you want me to say, again.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 2, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I never said anything about them being magical. You're projecting what you want me to say, again.



If aggression is part of training then why can't we account for it?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 3, 2019)

drop bear said:


> If aggression is part of training then why can't we account for it?


During normal classes, folks won’t typically (hopefully) experience the sheer animal aggression of an attack. That was my whole point.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> During normal classes, folks won’t typically (hopefully) experience the sheer animal aggression of an attack. That was my whole point.



You have never rolled with a white belt then?


----------



## Buka (Dec 3, 2019)

I'm of the opinion that in order to deal with aggression you have to have experienced it first, both receiving and giving. It's like getting punched hard in the face - the first time that happens to a Martial Artist should not be in a real world fight.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 3, 2019)

drop bear said:


> If aggression is part of training then why can't we account for it?


Chinese wrestling is a style that emphasizes on aggression. You act like a tiger and trying to eat your opponent alive.

The difference is you don't wait for opportunity. You create opportunity, attack, attack, and still attack.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 4, 2019)

drop bear said:


> You have never rolled with a white belt then?


I've never had one go all-out on me. I've had them do some stupid stuff, even get more aggressive than necessary, but never had one just lose their mind that way. Probably any who headed in that direction got put with some senior student who could control them.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 4, 2019)

Buka said:


> I'm of the opinion that in order to deal with aggression you have to have experienced it first, both receiving and giving. It's like getting punched hard in the face - the first time that happens to a Martial Artist should not be in a real world fight.


Yeah. I'm still working on how to get more of it into training from time to time, for folks not interested in competition (where it would be easier to find, I think).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 4, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Chinese wrestling is a style that emphasizes on aggression. You act like a tiger and trying to eat your opponent alive.
> 
> The difference is you don't wait for opportunity. You create opportunity, attack, attack, and still attack.


That's good aggression, but not the "animal aggression" I was speaking of.


----------



## JP3 (Dec 22, 2019)

drop bear said:


> We don't train for average.


I can understand that. For Jobo, I didn't indicate that the lighter/smaller-framed person would come in and be able to "mix it up" witht he bigger stronger athletes. There is direct advantage in being bigger, faster, stronger we all get that.

Note I wrote "survive on the ground."  Not "win on the ground," which is a totally different measuring stick. TO be able to maintain a point of control, even if it is moving from position to position, or location on the opponent's body to another location, avoiding getting strikes raining down on a vulnerable & unprotected body part (face, head, throat, ribs, belly, kidneys ... groin on guys).... while all the while the opponent is trying to do exactly that... that's what I'm trying to indicate by "survive ont he ground." When int hat mode, you aren't going to win anything, except to be able to live another day.


----------



## jobo (Dec 22, 2019)

JP3 said:


> I can understand that. For Jobo, I didn't indicate that the lighter/smaller-framed person would come in and be able to "mix it up" witht he bigger stronger athletes. There is direct advantage in being bigger, faster, stronger we all get that.
> 
> Note I wrote "survive on the ground."  Not "win on the ground," which is a totally different measuring stick. TO be able to maintain a point of control, even if it is moving from position to position, or location on the opponent's body to another location, avoiding getting strikes raining down on a vulnerable & unprotected body part (face, head, throat, ribs, belly, kidneys ... groin on guys).... while all the while the opponent is trying to do exactly that... that's what I'm trying to indicate by "survive ont he ground." When int hat mode, you aren't going to win anything, except to be able to live another day.


 if we are talking about street attacks, surviving is winning, there's no judges to declare a winner, anyout come other than you being turned into a blooded mess is a victory, your objective was achieved, his wasn't

that strategy being successful is rather dependent on one of two things happening, one, someone breaks the fight up, two your attacker gets bored/frustrated with the lack of progress and gives up.

there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself


----------



## JP3 (Dec 24, 2019)

jobo said:


> if we are talking about street attacks, surviving is winning, there's no judges to declare a winner, anyout come other than you being turned into a blooded mess is a victory, your objective was achieved, his wasn't
> 
> that strategy being successful is rather dependent on one of two things happening, one, someone breaks the fight up, two your attacker gets bored/frustrated with the lack of progress and gives up.
> 
> there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself


----------



## JP3 (Dec 24, 2019)

jobo said:


> there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself



I'm getting the impression that you are somehow thinking that I'm not agreeing with you, Jobo, because what you just said doesn't bear on what I said in relation tot he O/P.

To me your point is that bigger, stronger & faster people win more than smaller slower and weaker people, regardless of what they do to train themselves up.  I can generally agree witht hat, except for your aforementioned outliers.

My point was that in my opinion a smaller, weaker person can make better progress, faster, towards being able to street defense skillset in BJJ for their initial term of practice than in aikido. That was it. Can you get there with aikido? I propose that you can, provided that you've got an real understanding in another couple sets of MA paradigms... but that takes way more time to get rounded out than the premise in the O/P.  Some would stayt hat the "primary" SD art used wouldn't be aikido int hat sense, and arguments could be made either way and nobody would be either right or wrong.  Kotegaeshi in aikido can be done as a wrist lock, a throwing technique or in jutsu fashion to directly destroy the wrist. Hapkido teaches the same technique, and the aim (with my training in HKD at least) was not to throw but to destroy the wrist (which is why the throws get "taken." Which is itself a whole another discussion that's going on in that other thread.  So, when the bad guy swings and your hands fly up in the way and you end up with an arm, and then you slip and fall on the arm, which appens to land between you and the ground int he lock position and it goes "pop" were you doing aikido, or hapkido gravity-jutsu? Who knows and who cares. You got lucky, the technique fell into position and the effect took place.  Does the label mnatter at that point, except to perhaps explain what happened later on to someone who was not there so they can grasp the events? I don't think so.

Back to O/P. BJJ better to start with, IMO.


----------



## jobo (Dec 24, 2019)

JP3 said:


> I'm getting the impression that you are somehow thinking that I'm not agreeing with you, Jobo, because what you just said doesn't bear on what I said in relation tot he O/P.
> 
> To me your point is that bigger, stronger & faster people win more than smaller slower and weaker people, regardless of what they do to train themselves up.  I can generally agree witht hat, except for your aforementioned outliers.
> 
> ...



there's so many threads in a similar vein , i loose track of what ive posted in which.

my point of view on this, whilst not ag
actually disagreeing with you view is subtly different,

to my mind the ma which will be most effective for sd is the one, that demands the highest level of fitness from you, if that isn't aikido( and it probably isn't), then your correct, but for the wrong reasons, if you tie aikido in to a strength and fitness program, then it suddenly becomes more viable, the more you close the gap or preferably over take would be attacker the more viable it become

i help out at a boxing gym from time to time and last time there was a slip of a girl, about 17 throwing 200lb about like it was nothing in the weight room and throwing punches like hammers on the pads, whilst having movement like a ghost. i though '' she going to give someone a very nasty surprise one day'' take the strength and fitness away and she just another vulnerable young girl

or my own experience that i outlined in one thread or another that lau gar kung fu was ''deadly'' for sd, which was much mocked my martial D. and it was when i did it, the fitness  training was brutal, the free fighting at the end even more brutal, take those away and maybe its not so deadly after all


----------



## drop bear (Dec 24, 2019)

jobo said:


> if we are talking about street attacks, surviving is winning, there's no judges to declare a winner, anyout come other than you being turned into a blooded mess is a victory, your objective was achieved, his wasn't
> 
> that strategy being successful is rather dependent on one of two things happening, one, someone breaks the fight up, two your attacker gets bored/frustrated with the lack of progress and gives up.
> 
> there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off, which means you do need to be able to inflict enough damage to stop him, if you are to leave with minimum damage to yourself



Not if you wanted to create a manageable self defense method. 

Instead you would create scenario victories. So say a person grabs you. Then you would win if you release that grab. Which would bring you to a new scenario that you would try to win that. 

Keep winning those scenarios and you have a good chance of winning the situation. 

But it means you can create this flexible method that will allow you to adapt to an uncertain situation. 

Then it is a case of just setting objectives rather than relying on fixed objectives.

So instead of saying. "there a strong case that the longer it goes on, the more chance there is of his physical advantages paying off," 

You could either set an objective to scramble and escape or Mabye to grind and stall until help arrives. And have the tools to achieve either outcome.


----------



## jobo (Dec 24, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Not if you wanted to create a manageable self defense method.
> 
> Instead you would create scenario victories. So say a person grabs you. Then you would win if you release that grab. Which would bring you to a new scenario that you would try to win that.
> 
> ...


it's a fact, or at least a very likely out come, once you start avoiding facts and most scenario based training does that, then your starting to move into fantasy land.

many many years ago my friend returned from his army training and insisted on showing me his self defence skills," come up behind me and grab me round the n3ck"he said, "dont let go "he said and "il show you a throw "he said.

so I did just as he asked, a mins or so later he passed out, when he came to, he said" no not that hard or it doesn5 work" "do it again only this time dont choke me"
so I did and this time just pulled him backwards on to th4 floor.

eventually I got bored and let him throw me" see I told you it worked" he said


----------



## JP3 (Dec 25, 2019)

jobo said:


> or my own experience that i outlined in one thread or another that lau gar kung fu was ''deadly'' for sd, which was much mocked my martial D. and it was when i did it, the fitness  training was brutal, the free fighting at the end even more brutal, take those away and maybe its not so deadly after all


I'd offer that to take those away from the art... and it is no longer the art. For me, it's a package thing, the entire, complete package of what is being trained. We're back to labels again.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 25, 2019)

JP3 said:


> I'd offer that to take those away from the art... and it is no longer the art. For me, it's a package thing, the entire, complete package of what is being trained. We're back to labels again.



There are building  blocks that will make a martial arts work.

Like the concept that to swim you need to spend time in the water. To do martial arts you need grueling physical training to perform a grueling physical activity.

Stylistically though a system only occurs in the mind of the practitioner. There is no defining point where something is or isn't part of a system.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 25, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Not if you wanted to create a manageable self defense method.
> 
> Instead you would create scenario victories. So say a person grabs you. Then you would win if you release that grab. Which would bring you to a new scenario that you would try to win that.
> 
> ...


Hmm. Scenario training. Where has that come up before in discussions????


----------



## drop bear (Dec 25, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Hmm. Scenario training. Where has that come up before in discussions????



Normally as an alternative to sparring by martial artists who think that theater sports is combat training.

Scenario training in this case would be resisted drills. So I put you on a wall and then try to take you down. You try to escape the wall and gain an advantageous position.

We isolate a position and fight for a better one.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 25, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Normally as an alternative to sparring by martial artists who think that theater sports is combat training.
> 
> Scenario training in this case would be resisted drills. So I put you on a wall and then try to take you down. You try to escape the wall and gain an advantageous position.
> 
> We isolate a position and fight for a better one.


Yeah. My point is that you, in the past, have simply assumed from the term "scenario training" that it wasn't anything useful. We had a long discussion in a thread a couple of years ago with just that issue. What you're describing is one of the better types of drills that fall under "scenario training". You just assumed that's not what I meant, because you hear the term "Aikido" and lose all ability to listen.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 25, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Going to try something here. I'll assume you are correct, and no matter how skilled she gets at fighting, she will have a disadvantage against someone stronger without experience. I don't think that's the case, but i'll go with it.
> 
> So let's take three instances.
> 
> ...



I cannot agree with the percentages for a plethora of reasons, but I agree with the order or instances. 
I still think it is a question with near infinite answers. 
A Big variable that has rolled around in my mind since the OP reminds me of the Rocky quote that goes something like "it ain't about how hard you hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward". If the 130lb girl has a chance to get/keep her wits and is a fighter, she has a chance. If 200lb guy unsuspectingly hammers her, she does not have a very good chance at all.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 25, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> The only difference is sheer aggression. We can’t really account for that, but MMA outcomes seem to suggest the skills transfer.


I like that description. I might say controlled aggression. A more elegant expression than saying old fashioned "want to".


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 25, 2019)

geezer said:


> It’s also For entertainment. That’s why I don’t complain when Jobo goes off on one of his cantankerous tirades. I just make some popcorn or grab some chips. Besides he usually is at least half right, which makes the discussion interesting.


I admit to being mildly guilty of that at times. You are correct that occasionally, he will make a very cogent remark. 
I have blocked a couple of people and the forum has been a much more enjoyable place.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 25, 2019)

Buka said:


> My wife trained BJJ, she was 126 pounds.
> Fortunately nobody told her she couldn’t beat men twice her size.
> 
> True, she’s an evil, aggressive woman, but still.


That SO makes a point I have been trying to put in to words.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 25, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Yeah. My point is that you, in the past, have simply assumed from the term "scenario training" that it wasn't anything useful. We had a long discussion in a thread a couple of years ago with just that issue. What you're describing is one of the better types of drills that fall under "scenario training". You just assumed that's not what I meant, because you hear the term "Aikido" and lose all ability to listen.



Show me where I said that or even show me a video of your scenario training. 

You keep these things purposely vague


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 25, 2019)

drop bear said:


> If aggression is part of training then why can't we account for it?


Back in my competition days I had a problem with aggression in that I did not call on it soon enough sometimes. Too often I would have to let myself get banged on a bit before my engine really got started. 
Before starting MA's I had a problem controlling it on the top end but got pretty good control of it. 
It is a powerful ally and can be a vengeful enemy.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 25, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> I cannot agree with the percentages for a plethora of reasons, but I agree with the order or instances.
> I still think it is a question with near infinite answers.
> A Big variable that has rolled around in my mind since the OP reminds me of the Rocky quote that goes something like "it ain't about how hard you hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward". If the 130lb girl has a chance to get/keep her wits and is a fighter, she has a chance. If 200lb guy unsuspectingly hammers her, she does not have a very good chance at all.


Just a clarification, the percentages were made up for the purpose of explaining the concept. I’ve no idea what the actual percentages are.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> I like that description. I might say controlled aggression. A more elegant expression than saying old fashioned "want to".


My point was about the sheer aggression of the attacker, who is likely not controlled. We see more controlled aggression in things like MMA.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Show me where I said that or even show me a video of your scenario training.
> 
> You keep these things purposely vague


Actually, I'm quite happy to explain what I mean. You just weren't interested in listening at the time. I don't think I have the hour or so it would take to find the argument in question, though.

As for video, I've never gotten around to getting any (of any of my training, ever), so don't have any to share. I could take some, but I'm only teaching relative beginners currently, so it wouldn't show what I'm talking about.

When I use the term "scenario training", it simply refers to anything where you set up a scenario. This might restrict options for the attacker ("you want to drag them over to there"), or restrict the options for the defender ("you have an injured mate, and don't want to just run off"), or just set up a situation ("these pads represent tables and chairs"). Basically, it's just a different kind of drill. If I was training MMA, one example might be "you're up against the fence and tired".


----------



## jobo (Dec 26, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> My point was about the sheer aggression of the attacker, who is likely not controlled. We see more controlled aggression in things like MMA.


i think that's a false premise, its not aggression that isn't controlled, its adrenalin that not controlled

if that's a good or a bad thing is rather dependent on circumstances, some times you can get by with gross motor skills and the added benefit of the adrenal rush is a boon

its a real problem if your trying to play pool and a great benefit if your trying to move something very heavy


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Actually, I'm quite happy to explain what I mean. You just weren't interested in listening at the time. I don't think I have the hour or so it would take to find the argument in question, though.
> 
> As for video, I've never gotten around to getting any (of any of my training, ever), so don't have any to share. I could take some, but I'm only teaching relative beginners currently, so it wouldn't show what I'm talking about.
> 
> When I use the term "scenario training", it simply refers to anything where you set up a scenario. This might restrict options for the attacker ("you want to drag them over to there"), or restrict the options for the defender ("you have an injured mate, and don't want to just run off"), or just set up a situation ("these pads represent tables and chairs"). Basically, it's just a different kind of drill. If I was training MMA, one example might be "you're up against the fence and tired".



Ok so no video and no example of what I said.

Just a baseless accusation.

If we both say do sparring we very easily could not be doing the same thing. You could be doing something dumb with crap guys who can't fight.

Same with scenarios. You could be setting up scenarios that are not based on your experience of how those scenarios really play out.

Now when you say Aikido and basically every video of aikido that is available is someone doing something dumb with crap guys who can't fight. I lean towards the evidence I can see.

Because that is all I have.

Aikido self defense scenario.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2019)

Mma scenarios.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Ok so no video and no example of what I said.
> 
> Just a baseless accusation.
> 
> ...


My point is that you have repeatedly made claims of what my training is like. I'm okay with you starting from the evidence you have. But when you try to tell me my training doesn't include things because you've not seen evidence of them, that's just unobjective bias. If you said, "Okay, if you do ___, then that's good. But I have a hard time believing it, because I think everyone who trains Aikido is the same," at least then you'd be honest about your bias.

And remember that I train "Aikido" the group of arts (my primary art is Nihon Goshin Aikido), not "Aikido" the art founded by Ueshiba. The difference is significant in most cases. Some of the same issues exist between the two groups, but few of the videos you find will be of NGA. It'd be like me pointing at videos of a college wrestling class and saying, "you do ground stuff, and this is what ground stuff is like". I might hit some good points, but I'd miss on some important stuff, because BJJ isn't the same as wrestling.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Mma scenarios.


My internet's running too slow to watch them. I'll try again in the morning if I have a chance before I get on the road.

To clarify what I mean about scenarios...they run a wide range. Some are pretty simple: "Dude has a knife/stick/chair, and you have defend yourself." Some are more specific, like some of the "BJJ lab" stuff Tony has done (though he's doing a better job of them, as he gets to a one-on-one with as close to the real environment as possible, and in the dojo we're usually making do with what is handy). Sometimes they are soft and technical (about the pressure of a relative beginner doing slow rolling), and sometimes they're pretty energetic. Rarely are they full resistance, because I want them to stay "in the scenario" (rather than using their favorite technique to win), but they always have some level of resistance.

I don't think they have solid boundaries. They're drills. As I think about it, most drills are some sort of "scenario", except for live sparring.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> My point is that you have repeatedly made claims of what my training is like



Ok where have I done that?

I think you are making the claims.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> And remember that I train "Aikido" the group of arts (my primary art is Nihon Goshin Aikido), not "Aikido" the art founded by Ueshiba. The difference is significant in most cases. Some of the same issues exist between the two groups, but few of the videos you find will be of NGA. It'd be like me pointing at videos of a college wrestling class and saying, "you do ground stuff, and this is what ground stuff is like". I might hit some good points, but I'd miss on some important stuff, because BJJ isn't the same as wrestling.



So show us a video of what you mean. You can't keep falling back on vague and complaining that people get the wrong impression.

You don't get it both ways.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 27, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Ok where have I done that?
> 
> I think you are making the claims.


So, you want me to prove your actions? I really don’t have the time to spend on that. If you don’t recall spending the better part of several months repeatedly making rather bold proclamations (without evidence, I might add) about the nature of my training, then I don’t see much point in continuing this part of t he discussion.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 27, 2019)

drop bear said:


> So show us a video of what you mean. You can't keep falling back on vague and complaining that people get the wrong impression.
> 
> You don't get it both ways.


I actually don’t mind if folks get the wrong impression. I just try to clarify where I can. Since I don’t have video, I can’t give video. Pretty simple. Mind you, you apparently allow no possibility that I’m being truthful. I’m not sure why you’re so driven to assume the worst about my training. Really, how does it affect you?


----------



## timalakiesdiavazw (Dec 27, 2019)

Women are athletically on par to equally trained 13-14 year old boys. Any martial art that hands out affirmative action black belts to women, while barring young teen boys from earning black belts has a double standard. If young teen boys aren't worthy of the rank, then neither are women. Plain and simple.

Those talking about outliers need to realize that they go in the opposite direction too. A woman being able to compete against a man is about as likely as a 10 year old child being able to compete against a woman. Of course there's no child empowerment nonsense trying to pretend that this statistically insignificant occurrence is commonplace.

Men are taller, have significantly more muscle mass both in the upper and lower body, have more fast twitch muscle fibers, have stronger bones and ligaments, are faster and are less prone to injuries. There's absolutely no contest.

Women don't belong in martial arts, it's a delusional idea really. I don't understand why martial arts have so many beta white knights trying to pretend otherwise.


----------



## jobo (Dec 27, 2019)

timalakiesdiavazw said:


> Women are athletically on par to equally trained 13-14 year old boys. Any martial art that hands out affirmative action black belts to women, while barring young teen boys from earning black belts has a double standard. If young teen boys aren't worthy of the rank, then neither are women. Plain and simple.
> 
> Those talking about outliers need to realize that they go in the opposite direction too. A woman being able to compete against a man is about as likely as a 10 year old child being able to compete against a woman. Of course there's no child empowerment nonsense trying to pretend that this statistically insignificant occurrence is commonplace.
> 
> ...


 thers a certain amount of truth in your rational, but your overstating it somewhat, blackbelt are handed out for skill not athleticism, so a strength defect shouldn't really detract from them being awarded to women

with ''professional athletes'' of the same discipline, women have about 60% of the strength of their male counter parts, however with power based events like sprinting they are only down about 10% on performance, so all those fast twitch fibres make a difference, just no where near what you're suggesting

with non athletes its very difficult to give any thing like an accurate figure, because nobody is measuring it/ before you draw my attention to the graph you posted above, can i point out is has an 80 yo male with the same grip strength as a 17/18 yo male and just as bizarrely an 80 male being far stronger than a 25 yo woman. that is clearly not right so the whole data set is in question


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 27, 2019)

Thread locked pending staff review. 

William H
@kempodisciple
Martialtalk Moderator


----------

