# Self Defense against an MMA trained aggressor



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

In the city that I am moving, MMA is very very popular.  There are MMA gyms everywhere.  This very much increases the chance of having to defend oneself against someone trained in MMA.  How would you prepare yourself to defend yourself in this situation?  What kind of strategies would you use to defend yourself?


----------



## cfr (Jun 13, 2008)

What makes you think that MMA folks are out looking to start a fight?


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

cfr said:


> What makes you think that MMA folks are out looking to start a fight?


 
This is not a thread intended to bash MMA in any way.  It's not my intent to imply that someone trained in MMA is in any way more likely to aggress in a self defense situation.  Think of this thread like you would think of any other style thread in a self defense situation.  Anyone can be the bad guy and sometimes the bad guys train in MA.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

Carry a hanbo, ehem, I mean a walking stick, a folding knife, a piece of rope, shuriken if they are legal in your area, metsubushi (which could be in the form of pepper spray, or even a high intensity flashlight at night), a taser, or whatever other weapon you feel comfortable with. I don't know where you are, but in California, which has extremely strict self defense laws, you are allowed to use a weapon against an attacker, even if they are unarmed, as long as you don't continue to wale on them after the threat has been removed.

Whoops, should've checked before I spoke...now I see you're in WI. but it doesn't make a difference cause I have no idea what the laws are there...


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 13, 2008)

MMA is what it says it is, mixed martial arts so you would defend yourself against someone who has done MMA the same way you would any other martial artist. They are unlikely to want to take it to the floor if it's on the street etc so you would be fighting stand up.


----------



## cfr (Jun 13, 2008)

I think the biggest mistake you could make against an MMA person would be to assume they will play by MMA rules. Too often the assumption is "I would just bite him/ strike his neck/ poke his eye/ etc." when discussing a fight with an MMA guy. 

But I think you should assume an MMA guy would also do those things as well.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

What kind of MMA training or competition rules would be easiest to exploit on the street?  What would an MMA guy not be prepared for?

Good point about weapons.


----------



## cfr (Jun 13, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> What kind of MMA training or competition rules would be easiest to exploit on the street? What would an MMA guy not be prepared for?
> 
> Good point about weapons.


 

My point exactly... why are you assuming they would fight you based on rules?


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> MMA is what it says it is, mixed martial arts so you would defend yourself against someone who has done MMA the same way you would any other martial artist. They are unlikely to want to take it to the floor if it's on the street etc so you would be fighting stand up.


 
You don't think the fight would end up on the ground at all?  Or is your point that chances are it would be stand-up?


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

cfr said:


> My point exactly... why are you assuming they would fight you based on rules?


 
Because it happens with other arts.  People get in the habit of fighting how they spar and in a SD situation, why wouldn't that be the first thing to come out?  Especially given the stress and adrenaline...


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> What kind of MMA training or competition rules would be easiest to exploit on the street? What would an MMA guy not be prepared for?
> 
> Good point about weapons.


 
When it's SD, you take ANY advantage you can get my friend...


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Because it happens with other arts. People get in the habit of fighting how they spar and in a SD situation, why wouldn't that be the first thing to come out? Especially given the stress and adrenaline...


 
Careful, I think I can distinctly see a can labeled "worms" being slowly opened here...


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

allenjp said:


> When it's SD, you take ANY advantage you can get my friend...


 
True dat!  But what advantages may be most likely based on the nature of MMA training?


----------



## cfr (Jun 13, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Because it happens with other arts. People get in the habit of fighting how they spar and in a SD situation, why wouldn't that be the first thing to come out? Especially given the stress and adrenaline...


 
Could be I suppose. But shouldn't all SD training have the requirement of not expecting specifics? Im certainly no SD expert (or MMA expert for that matter), but that would be my guess. It seems to me that you would be setting yourself up for a bad surpise that way.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> True dat! But what advantages may be most likely based on the nature of MMA training?


 
It kinda depends...see, you can't assume that someone who trains "MMA" hasn't trained in "TMA" including weapons training of some kind, perhaps extensively. That said, if the particular MMA stylist you are up against happens to only train for the ring, they don't train in weapons use and you would have a distinct advantage there. But if you carry a weapon (preferably several), I would say you increase your chances no matter what the situation.


----------



## cfr (Jun 13, 2008)

allenjp said:


> Careful, I think I can distinctly see a can labeled "worms" being slowly opened here...


 
If you are referring too me, please read my last post. I am certainly not one to come to the defnse of MMA, I simply think to plan SD against rules is foolish.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

allenjp said:


> Careful, I think I can distinctly see a can labeled "worms" being slowly opened here...


 
Yeah, I know that I'm skirting around a flame war and it's not my intent to start one.  I'm serious about this.  I'm moving to Oahu in less then three weeks and MMA is hyper popular there.  I don't go out and try to start fights and I know how to stay out of bad situations, but things happen.  A good friend of mine was surfing and caught a wave ahead of another guy who proceeded to get angry, out of control, and violent.  My friend got his *** handed to him and it turns out the agressor just so happened to train at a MMA gym.  Now, I know he could have trained in any MA, but in this situation, it was MMA.  So this is where this line of questioning is coming from.  I'm not trying to pick some kind of silly online fight.


----------



## cfr (Jun 13, 2008)

BTW, how will you know if your attacker trains in MMA?


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

cfr said:


> If you are referring too me, please read my last post. I am certainly not one to come to the defnse of MMA, I simply think to plan SD against rules is foolish.


 
I see your point, but I think there is nothing wrong with at least thinking about what you may be up against...


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

cfr said:


> BTW, how will you know if your attacker trains in MMA?


 
He won't, he's just saying that there's a higher probability of it being an mma person because of the popularity of mma in that area.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

cfr said:


> BTW, how will you know if your attacker trains in MMA?


 
The guy's wearing some form of Tapout Gear?  Honestly, another good question.  Leg kicks, shooting, clinching, knees, muay thai...not going to be thinking about that in a fight, just trying to save my ***, but maybe some opening that I could recognize would present itself.


----------



## tellner (Jun 13, 2008)

Let's see. The typical MMA guy is in very good physical condition. He can take a punch. He can land one. He's comfortable far away, boxing, in the clinch or on the ground. It sounds like it's going to be a long, long day if you try to play knuckle tag or wrestle with him. 

So don't. 

Be fast off the mark because every second you waste plays to his advantages. 

Use a weapon if you can. 

Remember that concrete is a much less forgiving surface than canvas or mats. 

Use things in your environment that are not normally found in a gym or an MMA Octagon. 

MMA is less constrained than most martial arts or martial sports, but it has conventions. Tap. If he relaxes or lets up then take that moment of hesitation to launch the nastiest, most devastating, highest-percentage attack you have. You'll have a moment while his mental gears switch. When they do he'll be really pissed, so make sure your one shot is a good one. 

Other than that, follow the same principles you would against any dangerous or trained attacker.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 13, 2008)

In MMA competitions when they go to the ground it's nice clean padded canvas, no one goes to the gorund in the street if they can help it, broken glass, vomit, dog mess, other peoples feet within kicking distance etc.
If an MMA fighter is going to fight on the street I very much doubt any rules will come into his head, as everyone who has ever sparred in a club will testify, competitions are very different from a real fight, it won't be MMA it will be Vale tudo - anything goes!
I know it's different in the States but most MMA fighters I know have trained in TMAs before, some still do. I think the advantage MMAers have is that because of the nature of their training they aren't fixed as to being only able to do standup or only being able to do groundwork, they expect anything as well that can come their way whether it's kick, punches or takedowns.
I would suggest watching Bas Ruttens excellent dvd on self defence.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> In MMA competitions when they go to the ground it's nice clean padded canvas, no one goes to the gorund in the street if they can help it, broken glass, vomit, dog mess, other peoples feet within kicking distance etc.
> If an MMA fighter is going to fight on the street I very much doubt any rules will come into his head, as everyone who has ever sparred in a club will testify, competitions are very different from a real fight, it won't be MMA it will be Vale tudo - anything goes!
> I know it's different in the States but most MMA fighters I know have trained in TMAs before, some still do. I think the advantage MMAers have is that because of the nature of their training they aren't fixed as to being only able to do standup or only being able to do groundwork, they expect anything as well that can come their way whether it's kick, punches or takedowns.
> I would suggest watching Bas Ruttens excellent dvd on self defence.


 
Good idea, I have seen some of his recorded stuff and it is good!

BTW if you're going to be in HI., won't there be a lot of sand around...? Pick it up and throw it...


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

Whatever you do, look up all the local laws about self defense first, it's a lot worse fighting in jail than on the street...


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

Well, I know one thing that might be helpful.  Get my butt in a MMA gym.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

...never hurts to broaden your horizons a little...


----------



## cfr (Jun 13, 2008)

Someone suggested a weapon, that make sense. Again, training for SD is something Im really new too, but I would assume a weapon would be the only thing that make sense for SD situation?

After all, when it come to SD, do you want to win, or see if you can win?


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

allenjp said:


> ...never hurts to broaden your horizons a little...


 
I met some students of Relson Gracie and they offered to invite me to his gym.  Also, there is a very good MMA gym in Kaneohe.  Apparently, both Robbie Lawler and BJ Penn have trained there...


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 13, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> I met some students of Relson Gracie and they offered to invite me to his gym. Also, there is a very good MMA gym in Kaneohe. Apparently, both Robbie Lawler and BJ Penn have trained there...


 
Oooh get yourself down there and get your spare room ready I'll be there as soon as I can to come with you LOL!
Seriously though I'd go if I were you, MMA gyms tend to be friendly and more casual than TMA places so it can make a pleasant change to train in a different atmosphere. They will enjoy your TMA input as well! Seriously, very few MMAers will resist training with someone who has different techniques for them to try.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 13, 2008)

I've heard that Relson's school is amazing!


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jun 13, 2008)

I dunno... how do you train SD against anyone where you don't know their skills before the first move?  Same as someone skilled in Tae Kwon Do or Hapkido or BJJ or....  You have to react to the motion of the moment and probably don't know what their training base is.  And even if you did, how many moves or how much time are you going to have to put together a strategy?

And for that matter... how much of their training is sport based and how much is combat based?  Someone who trains an art (TKD, BJJ, MMA) for the sport competition  is going to fight a lot differently than someone who trains for combat, or art.

So in that second of "hmmm...I just pissed this guy off and he's taking a swing at me... but he trains in [MMA|TKD|WuShu|Muy Thai] so that means my approach should be to do..."

I guess practicing SD against different partners to get a feel for what you might see would be good, but I'm not sure if you can put together a "SD against MMA" mentality because.... at what point do you figure out this piece of information?


----------



## frank raud (Jun 13, 2008)

There was an article in SWAT magazine a few months ago about defending against rogue MMAers. I'll have to dig it out, but I remember it referencing to understanding clinch work and the use of knives.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 13, 2008)

frank raud said:


> There was an article in SWAT magazine a few months ago about defending against rogue MMAers. I'll have to dig it out, but I remember it referencing to understanding clinch work and the use of knives.


 
Rogue MMAers? How do we go rogue then? good grief we're only martial artists like everyone else here!


----------



## 7starmarc (Jun 13, 2008)

I don't know too much about the islands, but I have known some resident physicians who have done internship training in Hawaii. From what they've told me, MMA training is probably not what you have to worry about most. According to them, they got pretty good at treating knife wounds on their trauma service (moreso than other colleagues training in other regions). I'm not sure how representative that is, but it appears that knives are relatively common weapons out there.

As to your question about MMA, I assume your referring to the "classic" Muy Thai/BJJ combo or the ground and pounders, as these are probably the most common styles trained in MMA gyms.

I'd say, first and foremost, maintain all other SD principles of awareness, de-escalation, etc.

If the fit hits the shan, respect the striking, watch for and defend the takedowns. If you do get taken down, watch for both BJJ moves and pounding, and get to your feet as quickly as possible in any way possible, because he might have friends.

Obviously, some of your reactions will depend on your skillset, but I have yet to see someone recommend going to the ground in self defense. Remember, do not get into the mindset that this is a sparring match, nobody has agreed on any rules or safeguards, you don't know how far the other guy will go.

And watch for those knives.

As for your use of weapons. Be careful. You better be real sure you're not the one escalating things to deadly force.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 13, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Rogue MMAers? How do we go rogue then? good grief we're only martial artists like everyone else here!


 
The point of the article was having a few strategies for dealing with being taken to the ground or put into submissions or chokes.  It wasn't slamming MMA, just saying that an MMA-trained attacker presents a very serious problem (I guess you could even say the author was paying MMA a "left-handed" compliment).

edit: for anyone interested, the article titled "CONDITION RED! Defending Against Rogue Mixed Martial Artists" by Steve Moses was in the March '08 issue of SWAT Magazine


----------



## PG Michael B (Jun 13, 2008)

In reality good people do not attack good people. I have been training 28 + years and never in that time have I ever had an altercation with a martial artist. The skirmishes I have been involved with were due to beer muscled buffoons or out of control ding dongs who believe that a sucker punch and an attitude wins the day. However, for this scenario it to me is quite simple...do not duel! That falls into the game of an MMA guy in spades. Do what you do and do it sneaky, dirty, underhanded and first...the old adage..hit, hard fast and first. Do not play the hey dude I am a bad *** look at me crappola that has all the makings of a baboon chest puffing contest. Ambush him (ambush is a mind set not a technique)....do what you gotta do and simply drive on. 

If you ain't cheating you ain't trying...Go ugly early and WIN!!!!...if it escalates draw you shank and go to work..same/same with a pistola..just be damn sure you have to! 

 Keep your head, breath and carry on..hooah! Better yet...just don't put yourself there...listen to that gut instinct!

PG Michael B
Bahad Zu'Bu KA'LI Ilustrisimo

www.bahadzubuwest.org


----------



## Imminent (Jun 13, 2008)

My suggestion is if it hits the fan, and you can't avoid the attack by leaving safely, if he's armed drive inside his arc and take deep eyes or collapse the windpipe or drop the shoulder into his knee until you hit the ground with it, if not armed groin, ankle and/or knees, maybe a little kino mutai if he tries to take you down.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 13, 2008)

Imminent said:


> ...maybe a little kino mutai if he tries to take you down.


 
Oh, ewww.  My teachers teacher had everyone gnawing through raw steaks in order to learn correct biting techniques.  I suppose though, if the flesh has got to fly, then it's got to fly...


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 13, 2008)

If you wish to defeat an opponent understand how they fight. MMA has the term "mixed" in it. So understand what is involved. 

Might even be a good idea to go to a MMA school, don't tell them your skills, and learn from them to see what they have. 

You might even pick up some good skills you like (and that's why at heart I'm a JKD man, cuase I pick what is usefull to me from any place I can learn.)

I presume the fear here is ground fighting. There are many things one can do, like knee strikes, elbow slams from above, eye jabs and pokes (while o the ground), mouth rips, scrotum grabs, biting (ear, nose, throat, hands, forearms, etc..). 

Other things like use of folder knives, ice picks, stilettos, and the like. And of course, a good Smith Centennial .38 in the thigh, or ribs, or back, does wonders to get people off you.

Deaf


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

cfr said:


> My point exactly... why are you assuming they would fight you based on rules?


 Mostly because human beings are creatures of habit, and continuous repetative training in MMA will result in those techniques coming out under the stress of conflict.....we revert to what is conditioned in conflict.  We do not change are game plan in mid-fight very often.  If you're a boxer, you'll punch in a street fight, if you're a wrestler you're likely to wrestle.  What ever you've programmed through thousands of drills and repetations is what you're going to go to.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

PG Michael B said:


> In reality good people do not attack good people. I have been training 28 + years and never in that time have I ever had an altercation with a martial artist. The skirmishes I have been involved with were due to beer muscled buffoons or out of control ding dongs who believe that a sucker punch and an attitude wins the day. However, for this scenario it to me is quite simple...do not duel! That falls into the game of an MMA guy in spades. Do what you do and do it sneaky, dirty, underhanded and first...the old adage..hit, hard fast and first. Do not play the hey dude I am a bad *** look at me crappola that has all the makings of a baboon chest puffing contest. Ambush him (ambush is a mind set not a technique)....do what you gotta do and simply drive on.
> 
> If you ain't cheating you ain't trying...Go ugly early and WIN!!!!...if it escalates draw you shank and go to work..same/same with a pistola..just be damn sure you have to!
> 
> ...


 That's key.....hit early, hit often, and seek to end the conflict before he even decides to seriously BEGIN IT!  

The difference between the street and the ring is that two guys in a ring know the exact precise moment when the fight begins....the bell rings or the referee says 'Lets get it on!'.......there's no ambivalence.  In the street, there is far more room for subterfuge and deception.....THOSE are the key elements that seperate the ring from the street, the more random unpredictability of it all!  That's why getting in to a guys OODA loop early and jamming his ability to respond up is key.  

SPEED, SURPRISE AND VIOLENCE OF ACTION!

Having a killer instinct is not a requirement for the ring.....it's a competition as well as a fight, and many 'fighters' view themselves as competitors.  It's a limited conflict with clearly defined rules.  A street fight necessitates killer instinct!  You have to be willing to sum up a situation and decide to fire BEFORE the other guy does!



> "&#8216;Well, Bill was a pretty good shot, but he could not shoot as quick as half a dozen men we all knew in those days. Nor as straight, either. But Bill was cool, and the men he went up against were rattled, I guess. Bill beat them to it. He made up his mind to kill the other man before the other man had finished thinking, and so Bill would just quietly pull his gun and give it to him. That was all there was to it. It is easy enough to beat the other man if you start first. Bill always shot as he raised his gun. That is, he was never in a hurry about it; he just pulled the gun from his hip and let it go as he was raising it; shoot on the up-raise, you might call it. Most men lifted the gun higher, then threw it down to cock it before firing. Bill cocked it with his thumb, I guess, as it was coming up into line with his man. That&#8217;s how he did it. But he was not the quickest man by any means. He was just cool and quiet, and started first. Bill Hickox was not a bad man, as is often pictured. But he was a bad man to tackle. Always cool, kind, and cheerful, almost, about it. And he never killed a man unless that man was trying to kill him." -Buffalo Bill Cody on Wild Bill Hickock


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> The point of the article was having a few strategies for dealing with being taken to the ground or put into submissions or chokes. It wasn't slamming MMA, just saying that an MMA-trained attacker presents a very serious problem (I guess you could even say the author was paying MMA a "left-handed" compliment).
> 
> edit: for anyone interested, the article titled "CONDITION RED! Defending Against Rogue Mixed Martial Artists" by Steve Moses was in the March '08 issue of SWAT Magazine


 Exactly!  And that was an excellent article!

For dealing with a 'life or death grappling situation'......the small pocket folder is VASTLY underrated!  A 3-inch blade can turn being pummelled to death by a WORLD CLASS GRAPPLER in to bleeding OUT a WORLD CLASS GRAPPLER!  Simply being remove the folder from the pocket and begin sticking it in to organs in the flank of whatever side of the body you drew the knife on, and repeat as needed!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Rogue MMAers? How do we go rogue then? good grief we're only martial artists like everyone else here!


  MMA is like Boxing, it's a collection of techniques and practices which are devoid of any underlying philosophical framework.....which isn't an insult to Boxing or MMA, just pointing out that it's morally neutral in the sense that it's practitioners aren't concerned with instilling any set of moral or ethical values, unlike most traditional martial arts.  MMA is a tool, and for good or ill depends on the moral standing of the user.  

Since MMA is a popular sport and practice, how to defend oneself against someone trained in it is a legitimate concern.....just as defending oneself against a boxer would be.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 14, 2008)

As I said I wouldn't assume people will go to the ground with a fight as many people have said many times on here and numerous other places, you don't want to be on the floor in the street,pub or club. Nor do you want to get caught against a wall or a fence, another place that perhaps MMA trained fighters are accustomed to using in a fight that other MA aren't. 
I assume the magazine will be following up with articles on rogue TKDers, Whin Chun, Judo etc? LOL! I wouldn't want a fight with any of them either! It just doesn't help the perception of MMA by other martial artists does it? I wouldn't say MMA doesn't instil any moral or ethical values though, good sportsmanship (and what goes with that) is very highly valued and every club and coach I know is at pains to instil that into their fighters. It shows too.
As I said most of our fighters do come from a TMA background as well, TKD being more common than MT, we have several TKD blackbelts who fight, I wouldn't expect high kicks off them in a street fight though. One thing I think that MMAers have is the ability to adapt really quickly to whom they're fighting.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> As I said I wouldn't assume people will go to the ground with a fight as many people have said many times on here and numerous other places, you don't want to be on the floor in the street,pub or club. Nor do you want to get caught against a wall or a fence, another place that perhaps MMA trained fighters are accustomed to using in a fight that other MA aren't.
> I assume the magazine will be following up with articles on rogue TKDers, Whin Chun, Judo etc? LOL! I wouldn't want a fight with any of them either! It just doesn't help the perception of MMA by other martial artists does it? I wouldn't say MMA doesn't instil any moral or ethical values though, good sportsmanship (and what goes with that) is very highly valued and every club and coach I know is at pains to instil that into their fighters. It shows too.
> As I said most of our fighters do come from a TMA background as well, TKD being more common than MT, we have several TKD blackbelts who fight, I wouldn't expect high kicks off them in a street fight though. One thing I think that MMAers have is the ability to adapt really quickly to whom they're fighting.


 Don't get all melodramatic......other than shared techniques, there is no underlying 'philosophy' of MMA, unlike TKD and other TMA's......ergo, you don't have a 'philosophy' that is being attacked.  It would be equivalent to being upset because we started discussing defenses against boxing......which, in essence, we are discussing defenses against a blend of boxing, wrestling, jui-jitsu and Muay Thai.

And for the record, who needs a defense against rogue TKDers? 

What IS 'MMA'?  It's a rather broad question........MMA is a buffet of techniques that works in the ring and in the cage where the rules are that punching, kicking and grappling are allowed.....it is NOT a moral system or a philosophical one......and no requirement of any particular moral or ethical standard in order to compete and train.  You have your Randy Coutures who you'd likely not run in to in a bar in the first place and certainly wouldn't find any trouble from, and conversely you have your Tank Abbott's who if you run afoul of them while their surly and in their cups might grant you a beating for your trouble.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 14, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Don't get all melodramatic......other than shared techniques, there is no underlying 'philosophy' of MMA, unlike TKD and other TMA's......ergo, you don't have a 'philosophy' that is being attacked. It would be equivalent to being upset because we started discussing defenses against boxing......which, in essence, we are discussing defenses against a blend of boxing, wrestling, jui-jitsu and Muay Thai.
> 
> And for the record, who needs a defense against rogue TKDers?
> 
> What IS 'MMA'? It's a rather broad question........MMA is a buffet of techniques that works in the ring and in the cage where the rules are that punching, kicking and grappling are allowed.....it is NOT a moral system or a philosophical one......and no requirement of any particular moral or ethical standard in order to compete and train. You have your Randy Coutures who you'd likely not run in to in a bar in the first place and certainly wouldn't find any trouble from, and conversely you have your Tank Abbott's who if you run afoul of them while their surly and in their cups might grant you a beating for your trouble.


 

Hardly melodramatic! more amused I think!
I think MMA in the States as others have said is a different animal from MMA in the UK. Here boxing is thought to have moral value which is why it's called the sport of gentlemen.
MMA is more than just MT, BJJ and wrestling, over here we train Aikido, Karate, TKD,  Judo (more than wrestling) and even Krav Maga for MMA. 
I just checked our rules for fighting and yes there is a requirement for good sportsmanship and courtesy , points can be deducted even disqualification can follow is these rules are broken.  

Fouls: 
No elbows to head of a grounded opponent.
Butting with the head. 
Eye gouging of any kind. 
Biting. 
Hair pulling. 
Fish hooking. 
Groin attacks of any kind. 
Putting a finger into any orifice or into any cut or laceration on an opponent. 
Small joint manipulation. 
Striking to the spine or the back of the head. 
Striking downward using the point of the elbow even to the body. 
Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea. 
Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh. 
Grabbing the clavicle. 
Kicking the head of a grounded opponent. 
Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent. 
Stomping a grounded opponent. 
Kicking to the kidney with the heel. 
Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck. 
Throwing an opponent out of the ring or fenced area. 
Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent. 
Spitting at an opponent. 
Engaging in an unsportsmanlike conduct that causes an injury to an opponent. 
Holding the ropes or the fence. 
Using abusive language in the ring or fenced area. 
Attacking an opponent on or during the break. 
Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee. 
Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the period of unarmed combat. 
Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee. 
Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury. 
Interference by the corner. 
Throwing in the towel during competition. ​ 

 
​


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Hardly melodramatic! more amused I think!
> I think MMA in the States as others have said is a different animal from MMA in the UK. Here boxing is thought to have moral value which is why it's called the sport of gentlemen.
> MMA is more than just MT, BJJ and wrestling, over here we train Aikido, Karate, TKD, Judo (more than wrestling) and even Krav Maga for MMA.
> I just checked our rules for fighting and yes there is a requirement for good sportsmanship and courtesy , points can be deducted even disqualification can follow is these rules are broken.
> ...


 That's merely behavior in the ring.....there is no requirement for behavior outside the ring, much like boxing.....you can just have gotten out of prison for rape and return to the fight circuit.  Not so other TMA's and even other sports, which make attempt to ensure that those representing it aren't outlaws.

That's not an attack of MMA, merely pointing out that it's not a moral of philosophical system, but merely a term for a type of competition and the techniques used in that competition.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 14, 2008)

Oh er! I expected that list to come out down one side not flaunt itself down the middle! :dramaqueen:


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Oh er! I expected that list to come out down one side not flaunt itself down the middle! :dramaqueen:


 I think it looked more impressive the way it turned out.   I bet you couldn't make it do that again though if you wanted to!

But MMAer's like boxers are Gladiators.....and you can't expect men who seek to pummel other men for a living to ALWAYS be good moral men, kind to small and animals and children.  Surprisingly in MMA that's been the rule more often than not, but plenty of exceptions exist.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 14, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> That's merely behavior in the ring.....there is no requirement for behavior outside the ring, much like boxing.....*you can* *just have gotten out of prison and return to the fight circuit*.


 
TO be honest that's unlikely here, we are very small inthe UK and promoters know all the fighters and will chose not to have someone fight on our shows if they've been to prison etc. (The only one we know of that has been alledegly involved in criminal activities is now in Morroco and won't be coming back anytime soon.) I expect though that will change as/if MMA gets bigger here. We'll lose control and probably the government will step in.
We are smaller than nearly all other MA here, we only have 10 women who actively fight and perhaps only a couple hundred male fighters in all. All the promoters know each other and help each other out, we simply don't have the sheer weight of numbers that the States has so we retain the atmosphere and training of TMAs also in that goodsportmanship is instilled in young fighters.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 14, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> I think it looked more impressive the way it turned out.  I bet you couldn't make it do that again though if you wanted to!
> 
> But MMAer's like boxers are Gladiators.....and you can't expect men who seek to pummel other men for a living to ALWAYS be good moral men, kind to small and animals and children. Surprisingly in MMA that's been the rule more often than not, but plenty of exceptions exist.


 

You're right I couldn't!

As I said though MMA is very small here and to be honest there's maybe  three fighters I can think of that make a living out of MMA ( In America usually ) and a precarious one at that, there's no money in MMA here, the most a top fighter here will get is $3000 a fight, Ian Freeman I think has been paid the most at $20,000 but that was once. our fighters here although they fight pro rules are amateur fighters. fighters who go under semi pro and amateur rules don't get paid , they may get expenses. fighters here also don't fight regularly, it can be months between fights.
This means all fighters have other jobs which tends to preclude them from brawling in the street as they can't afford to lose their jobs/careers and living. keeps them in at night lol!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> You're right I couldn't!
> 
> As I said though MMA is very small here and to be honest there's maybe three fighters I can think of that make a living out of MMA ( In America usually ) and a precarious one at that, there's no money in MMA here, the most a top fighter here will get is $3000 a fight, Ian Freeman I think has been paid the most at $20,000 but that was once. our fighters here although they fight pro rules are amateur fighters. fighters who go under semi pro and amateur rules don't get paid , they may get expenses. fighters here also don't fight regularly, it can be months between fights.
> This means all fighters have other jobs which tends to preclude them from brawling in the street as they can't afford to lose their jobs/careers and living. keeps them in at night lol!


 Most professional MMA'ers aren't going to cause problems, but amature MMA here in the states is a HUGE growing phenomenon!  Most of what folks will face on the street isn't a professional MMAer, but an amature who's learned a little bit here and there.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 14, 2008)

We have something here called Cagefighter Syndrome! this is where a young man (invariable a man lol) tells people he's a cagefighter and has fought in the cage, when questioned they usually can't remember where or when or even who they train with. We even had one person telling us they'd fought on our show without realising who we were.
Our problem here is not rogue MMAers or any sort of martial artist, it's alcohol fueled violence on the streets. This is hard to combat both from a policing point of view - takes huge manpower to control and from a personal point of view because you don't know where it's going to come from or how many are going to be involved. it's rarely a one on one and it's seemingly random.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> We have something here called Cagefighter Syndrome! this is where a young man (invariable a man lol) tells people he's a cagefighter and has fought in the cage, when questioned they usually can't remember where or when or even who they train with. We even had one person telling us they'd fought on our show without realising who we were.
> Our problem here is not rogue MMAers or any sort of martial artist, it's alcohol fueled violence on the streets. This is hard to combat both from a policing point of view - takes huge manpower to control and from a personal point of view because you don't know where it's going to come from or how many are going to be involved. it's rarely a one on one and it's seemingly random.


  Yeah, Cagefighter Syndrome is sweeping the planet......pretty soon we'll have as many cage fighters in every bar as Delta Force, Green Berets and Seals! :drinky:


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 14, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Yeah, Cagefighter Syndrome is sweeping the planet......pretty soon we'll have as many cage fighters in every bar as Delta Force, Green Berets and Seals! :drinky:


 

http://www.cagewarriors.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25278

Very funny, PM for translations if anyone gets stuck.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jun 14, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Yeah, Cagefighter Syndrome is sweeping the planet......pretty soon we'll have as many cage fighters in every bar as Delta Force, Green Berets and Seals! :drinky:


 
Very true!


----------



## MJS (Jun 14, 2008)

Wow!!  This thread grew pretty quick!   Instead of quoting every post, I'll just give an overall reply.  

How do we defend against a MMAist?  IMHO, if your goal for training in the arts is SD, then you should be training as real as possible and do your best to be as well rounded as possible.  So that means, punching, kicking, weapons, ground work, scenario drills, etc.  If we stop and think about it, we don't know if anyone has training until the fight starts.  Our training doesnt turn us into supermen, but it should give us an advantage.  

The question came up of what would make us think that a MMA person couldn't do the 'dirty tricks' just like someone else.  The reply to that was what I usually say...sure they could do them, but....IMO, we tend to fall back on how we are trained.  If you know that going for the eyes or groin is a no-no in the ring, are you going to be thinking the same outside the ring?  Very possible.  Kinda like when we do weapon disarms in class.  When I disarm, I drop or toss the weapon away.  I don't hand it back to my partner, I make them get it.  Why?  Because if the time comes when I do this for real, I don't want to have it drilled into my head to hand the weapon back.  Subconsciously we just may do that.  

Thinking back to the Fight Quest show where Doug and Jimmy were doing Krav Maga.  Remember when Doug was running between those trees and the others would come out to attack him?  What did he usually do?  Try to take them down.  Avivit (sp) the female inst. he was working with, then went on a rant about using things that were on the ground, ie: sand in the eyes, a stick, etc.  Hey, if someone is hell bent on causing me serious harm, and I can pick up some dirt and throw it at them, a rock and hit them, I'm gonna do it.  I'll deal with the consequences later, but my life is more important than worrying whether or not someone will look bad upon be using a rock.  

Hey, I'm not knocking MMA.  I've learned some great stuff them, and IMO, everyone benefits. 

Mike


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 14, 2008)

Guys, I'm not a cage fighter! Why I was a 15 year old CIA assassian in the Vietnam Phoenix program!

You do believe that, right?

There will always be wannabies. People who want others to feel they are unique. It's been said that the most common trait of people is to be uncommon.

So expect alot of this to happen. Just like there are those who wear the U.S. military uniform but never have been in the military.

Deaf


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 14, 2008)

Well it's real simple.

It matters not what they are trained in, and you won't be able to tell until you lock up with/cross fists with/exchange fire with them/hit each other with pies/whatever.

The school's the school, the ring's the ring, the street's the street, and never must the three be confused.

If escape/deescalation isn't possible, do unto them before they do unto you.

Stop thinking Frank Shamrock, or Frank Trigg, and start thinking Frank CASTLE.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jun 14, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> In the city that I am moving, MMA is very very popular.  There are MMA gyms everywhere.  This very much increases the chance of having to defend oneself against someone trained in MMA.  How would you prepare yourself to defend yourself in this situation?  What kind of strategies would you use to defend yourself?




When I was in high school and before any formal training, if I got into an altercation, I would not wrestle the wrestler. I would not box the boxer. I would not kick box the kicker. I would do my thing what ever it was but I would not "play" by their rules.

Now, I would do what I would do no matter who they were. I would use weapons of opportunity. I would use terrain, and environment to my advantage. I would also continue with my attempts to avoid the situation. If physical action is required above and beyond the check or pass and move away, I fall back to my old ways, with the skill sets I have today. I end it as fast as I can. I convince the other person it was the wrong thing to do to proceed with their attempt of violence upon me.


----------



## cfr (Jun 14, 2008)

I think the "you'll fight how you train, so MMA'ers will follow their rules" thing has an inherant flaw in it. Every single time I bring this flaw up, I get no direct response. There are always those who post something like "oh, here we go again", and the like, but no real response to my question:

If we fight how we train, and MMA'ers will follow their rules, doesnt that mean TMA'ers will:

Go into a horse stance.
Chamber their hand back to the hip.
Not actually poke in the eyes, (or strike the throat/ groin/ etc.) but stop inches before.
etc.
These are real questions as it seems fairly logical that TMA'ers would be prone to the whole "fight how you train" thing like MMA'ers. I'd love to get a real response to these questions, so please don't be shy.


----------



## MJS (Jun 14, 2008)

cfr said:


> I think the "you'll fight how you train, so MMA'ers will follow their rules" thing has an inherant flaw in it. Every single time I bring this flaw up, I get no direct response. There are always those who post something like "oh, here we go again", and the like, but no real response to my question:
> 
> If we fight how we train, and MMA'ers will follow their rules, doesnt that mean TMA'ers will:
> 
> ...


 
Well, in an effort to break the no response pattern, I'll take a shot. 

IMO, if the MMAist just trains for the ring and if the TMAist just trains like you mention above, then yes, the results should be pretty predictable.  Do MMA people train SD, weapons, etc.?  I'm sure some may, but the majority of schools that I've seen in my area do not.  Now, I train in Kenpo.  Do I do strikes from a horse stance, rechambering as you mention above?  Yes, but I also spar, work boxing drills, and take advantage of protective gear to allow me to train those eye shots, groin hits, etc.  

I'll also go back to my analogy in my other post.  If you train weapon disarms, and every time you take the weapon away, you turn around and hand it back to them, that response is going to be so ingrained, there is a very good chance that you will actually do that in the heat of the moment.  By dropping the weapon, throwing it in another direction, I'm conditioning a response.  

Mike


----------



## cfr (Jun 14, 2008)

A sincere thanks for the response! What you are referring too are real MMA fighters. My training is really closer to MMA than anything else, but I am by no means a real fighter, nor will I ever be. That being said, I also train in weapons, etc., as I see the flaws in MMA for SD, as there are in any art. I'd venture a guess that there are lots of guys that enjoy the traning, but will never be real fighters, and therefore add in other stuff, just like me.


----------



## Nolerama (Jun 14, 2008)

MJS said:


> Well, in an effort to break the no response pattern, I'll take a shot.
> 
> IMO, if the MMAist just trains for the ring and if the TMAist just trains like you mention above, then yes, the results should be pretty predictable.  Do MMA people train SD, weapons, etc.?  I'm sure some may, but the majority of schools that I've seen in my area do not.  Now, I train in Kenpo.  Do I do strikes from a horse stance, rechambering as you mention above?  Yes, but I also spar, work boxing drills, and take advantage of protective gear to allow me to train those eye shots, groin hits, etc.
> 
> ...




I respect that, but that's like saying most of the TMA's in my neck of the woods don't ever think outside of their own style. And that's not right.

I'll pick up a weapon... and I'll know how to use it to defend myself, because that's what all MA's are supposed to do: train you for self defense.

Regardless, it doesn't matter. Talking about the validity of MMA in SD or sport is ridiculous. 

A large majority of the MMA community trained in some form of TMA prior to working out in an MMA gym. Many of them think of themselves as a [insert TMA here] with a good knowledge of other ranges/styles, maybe even superior. That's great because they think outside of convention and are well-rounded fighters. I think we should take MMA how it SHOULD be:

Train to fight well, so you win.

That's pretty simple, and flows in to personal philosophy and channeled into other parts of life. Most MAs strive for the best possible way to fight, right?

If you train to adapt to/in fighting, then you'll definitely fight like that. But I'm not giving some adversary his knife/stick/gun/whiffle ball bat back to him just because I give my training partner his wep back. That's just plain ridiculous. That's like saying I'm going to pat the guy I just knocked out (in an SD situation) on the back because I do that after every sparring session.

Bleh... sorry. I know you were posting a hypothesis, but I had to offer my difference in opinion.


----------



## MJS (Jun 14, 2008)

Nolerama said:


> I respect that, but that's like saying most of the TMA's in my neck of the woods don't ever think outside of their own style. And that's not right.


 
Hmm..if you re-read my post, you'll see that I said some MMA people may train SD, some may not.  So, although I didn't say this, the same can be said about TMAist.  Some may just train in a static horse stance and some may not. 



> I'll pick up a weapon... and I'll know how to use it to defend myself, because that's what all MA's are supposed to do: train you for self defense.


 
Well, true, it doesnt take much thought to use a knife.  However, some people who devote more in-depth study will use it better than those who don't.  



> Regardless, it doesn't matter. Talking about the validity of MMA in SD or sport is ridiculous.


 
I'm just another member posting in this thread, attempting to give the OP some answers to his questions.  



> A large majority of the MMA community trained in some form of TMA prior to working out in an MMA gym. Many of them think of themselves as a [insert TMA here] with a good knowledge of other ranges/styles, maybe even superior. That's great because they think outside of convention and are well-rounded fighters. I think we should take MMA how it SHOULD be:
> 
> Train to fight well, so you win.
> 
> That's pretty simple, and flows in to personal philosophy and channeled into other parts of life. Most MAs strive for the best possible way to fight, right?


 
Ok.  



> If you train to adapt to/in fighting, then you'll definitely fight like that. But I'm not giving some adversary his knife/stick/gun/whiffle ball bat back to him just because I give my training partner his wep back. That's just plain ridiculous. That's like saying I'm going to pat the guy I just knocked out (in an SD situation) on the back because I do that after every sparring session.
> 
> Bleh... sorry. I know you were posting a hypothesis, but I had to offer my difference in opinion.


 
And your opinion is certainly welcome.   However, take a look at this.
http://jimwagnertraining.com/article1atoz.html

I don't think its as ridiculous as you make it sound.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jun 14, 2008)

cfr said:


> I think the "you'll fight how you train, so MMA'ers will follow their rules" thing has an inherant flaw in it. Every single time I bring this flaw up, I get no direct response. There are always those who post something like "oh, here we go again", and the like, but no real response to my question:
> 
> If we fight how we train, and MMA'ers will follow their rules, doesnt that mean TMA'ers will:
> Go into a horse stance.
> ...




Which is why I have people poke me in the eyes. Which is why I touch their eyes as well. Hence my comment about ending it as soon as possible.


----------



## Nolerama (Jun 14, 2008)

MJS said:


> Hmm..if you re-read my post, you'll see that I said some MMA people may train SD, some may not.  So, although I didn't say this, the same can be said about TMAist.  Some may just train in a static horse stance and some may not.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's unfortunate for the LEOs, and I get where you're coming from. Thanks for posting that.

I think we should all be aware of real-life possibilities when we train. Bad habits can get us in trouble.


----------



## AJPerry (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi All

I just wanted to voice my experiences.  I trained in a few different styles through the years and they all had different rules for training.  As I started learning a new/different I would notice the restrictions I had placed on myself.  The rules were there for the safety of training but they taught bad habits for real life situations.

If you train where you don't hit each other hard in the head, you soon drop your hands to protect your body which leaves the head wide open.

If you don't allow groin shots then you don't cover it with a correct stance, low body, bent knees.

If you train only wrestling or BJJ you can forget to strike while on the ground.

There is a huge difference between sport fights and street fights and it's up to each person to decide what they want to learn.

But if you are an Instructor I feel it is Your Responsability to advise your students of what you teach.  Don't tell them you are teaching them self defense if they never get hit in the head, kicked in the groin or thrown off their feet and punched while on the gound.

The group I work with trains hard and nothing is outside the rules.  Sure it hurts but it's still fun training that way with friends.  It scares me to think that I thought I could protect myself but some of my old Instructors lived in a world full of BS rules that could have gotte me killed on the street.

My point is train as realistically as you can for what you want to achieve.  If you fight on the street and you want to resort to biting, ripping, eye, throat and groin shots then be prepared to finish them off because once you start that in a fight it will come back at you.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:


> I think the "you'll fight how you train, so MMA'ers will follow their rules" thing has an inherant flaw in it. Every single time I bring this flaw up, I get no direct response. There are always those who post something like "oh, here we go again", and the like, but no real response to my question:
> 
> If we fight how we train, and MMA'ers will follow their rules, doesnt that mean TMA'ers will:
> 
> ...


 And yet TMA's who started in the UFC years ago did exactly that.....there's your answer!

Oh, and if you didn't fight like you trained, what would be the point of training....answer THAT!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:


> A sincere thanks for the response! What you are referring too are real MMA fighters. My training is really closer to MMA than anything else, but I am by no means a real fighter, nor will I ever be. That being said, I also train in weapons, etc., as I see the flaws in MMA for SD, as there are in any art. I'd venture a guess that there are lots of guys that enjoy the traning, but will never be real fighters, and therefore add in other stuff, just like me.


 I refer you to Dan Severn's first fight with the Muay Thai guy.....he body slammed the guy several times, but never through a single punch or went for a submission.....he fought like he had trained for several years.  I talked to Dan Severn about that personally, and he said he had about a week to train for that fight, and after that he started training to punch.

You WILL fall back on your training, i've been a law enforcement trainer for too many years not to know THAT is reality!  It is exceedingly rare to innovate in the middle of a conflict....what happens vastly MORE often is that when the pressure is on we become 'Monkey Brained' and keep repetatively trying our 'go-to move' over and over again.  A guy doesn't suddenly do something he's never trained before in the middle of a fight....the mid-brain doesn't work that way.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 15, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> You WILL fall back on your training, i've been a law enforcement trainer for too many years not to know THAT is reality! It is exceedingly rare to innovate in the middle of a conflict....what happens vastly MORE often is that when the pressure is on we become 'Monkey Brained' and keep repetatively trying our 'go-to move' over and over again. A guy doesn't suddenly do something he's never trained before in the middle of a fight....the mid-brain doesn't work that way.


 
"You will NOT rise to the occasion, you will default to the level of training you have _mastered_."


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 15, 2008)

It's hard to argue with the last three posts, I have to say.  Experience and common sense simply expressed, gentlemen :rei:.

My input in debates like this one has ever been that you train for a purpose - to learn how to execute the techniques of your art.  The key is always that in training you try not to injure your partner (well not severly anyway ) which means certain self-imposed physical restraints.  

If you don't combine the rote embedding of the physical techniques with proper visualisation and a sense of putting your fist. foot or sword where you *choose*, then it can indeed be a problem translating that training into actuality should you ever need to.

The way around it is to ensure that you are always visualising what the outcome should be when you stop a technique 'short' whilst simultaneously inculcating the ability to place the 'weapon' where you want it to be.  That's one of the great strengths of kata - you dont have to pull or weaken a technique and can 'grind it' into reflex with strength and range of motion.

In many of our kata in MJER, we are dealing with multiple opponents and the kata delineates where these opponents are and the order in which they are dealt with.  However, the emphasis is always on visualisation - seeing in your minds eye the environment and the actions taking place {kids call it playing :lol:}.  

It is quite easy to see with a bit of experience when someone is not visualising and is just following the kata by the numbers because their body pre-prepares for the next 'count' and their eyes are not 'tracking' but almost looking 'within'.

Avoid that trap and if the need ever becomes urgent to use what you have trained then what you have trained should not produce unwanted shortfalls in speed, power and range.


----------



## cfr (Jun 15, 2008)

Just for the record, I have not once said "you won't really fight how you train" or anything like it. A few of you seem to be suggesting that I diasagree with the "fight how you train" concept, that which I don't. 

However, there seems to be a mindset that only MMA'ers will fall into this problem, and TMA'ers won't. Why is that? 

On paper, an MMA'er would play by sport rules, and a TMA'er would chamber his punch to his hip, stop his strike an inch before the target, etc.. But the world is not on paper. Anyone who has the ability to think outside the box a bit during his training can change it up a bit to overcome these issues, despite what he's traning in. 

Also, someone said "I touch the eyes" which is probably great training, but how many of us do this (either MMA or TMA)? Also, how many of us bite, scratch, strike to vitals, etc., during training? Probably not too many of us (again, regardless of which camp your in). Now before anyone spouts their supreme wisdom with something like "you couldn't do those things in training or you'd lose training partners", let me assure you I am already aware of that. :wink2:


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:


> However, there seems to be a mindset that only MMA'ers will fall into this problem, and TMA'ers won't. Why is that?



It's not.  That's a common criticism of TMA; in particular, forms and some sparring ('point' with light/no contact or WTF TKD with no head shots). It's a valid criticism, but  a very common one.


----------



## cfr (Jun 15, 2008)

This thread originated with "how to apply SD to an MMA'er", and my point all along has been to not assume an MMA'er will play by the rules on the street (seriously, go back and look and my first few replies). This was then met with "they will fight how they train", which got me on this tangent of "so will TMA'ers".


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 15, 2008)

So just go through your school/gym based training in your "off hours" and go through how you'd "spice up" what youve learned. It's all about how bloody minded you're willing to be when the time comes.

There is many a black belt who is dead today because he had the technical proficiency to earn the blackness in his belt, but who, when the time came on the street, didn't have the necessary blackness in his HEART when the time came on the street.


----------



## cfr (Jun 15, 2008)

Andy Moynihan said:


> So just go through your school/gym based training in your "off hours" and go through how you'd "spice up" what youve learned. It's all about how bloody minded you're willing to be when the time comes.


 

I guess that would be one way you could try it. Personally, I ask people "how could this be applied/ not applied in the street?". Seems to work out as most MMA'ers have backrounds in TMA's as well (as has been mentioned previously).


----------



## MJS (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:


> Just for the record, I have not once said "you won't really fight how you train" or anything like it. A few of you seem to be suggesting that I diasagree with the "fight how you train" concept, that which I don't.
> 
> However, there seems to be a mindset that only MMA'ers will fall into this problem, and TMA'ers won't. Why is that?
> 
> On paper, an MMA'er would play by sport rules, and a TMA'er would chamber his punch to his hip, stop his strike an inch before the target, etc.. But the world is not on paper. Anyone who has the ability to think outside the box a bit during his training can change it up a bit to overcome these issues, despite what he's traning in.


 
I think I gave a breakdown of this in another post.  Actually, yes, right here.  



> Also, someone said "I touch the eyes" which is probably great training, but how many of us do this (either MMA or TMA)? Also, how many of us bite, scratch, strike to vitals, etc., during training? Probably not too many of us (again, regardless of which camp your in). Now before anyone spouts their supreme wisdom with something like "you couldn't do those things in training or you'd lose training partners", let me assure you I am already aware of that. :wink2:


 
How many of us do this?  Hmm...depends on your training goals.  I do it, because my goals are SD.  Of course, everything has limits.  Even in BJJ, you don't always choke your partner out or break his arm, so like in the TMAs there are limits.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:


> Also, someone said "I touch the eyes" which is probably great training, but how many of us do this (either MMA or TMA)? Also, how many of us bite, scratch, strike to vitals, etc., during training? Probably not too many of us (again, regardless of which camp your in). Now before anyone spouts their supreme wisdom with something like "you couldn't do those things in training or you'd lose training partners", let me assure you I am already aware of that. :wink2:




Could this be the reason our club is so small?


----------



## Cryozombie (Jun 15, 2008)

Shoot them.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:
			
		

> This thread originated with "how to apply SD to an MMA'er", and my point all along has been to not assume an MMA'er will play by the rules on the street (seriously, go back and look and my first few replies). This was then met with "they will fight how they train", which got me on this tangent of "so will TMA'ers".


As I've said in other threads, I think this is a very valid point. It seems that most of us accept that we will "fight the way we train." This being the case, I think that we have to concede that _most_ MMA'ers are going to be better prepared than _most_ TMA'ers simply because they train with a higher level of contact and intensity. 
They may be following their "rules," but their rules call for beating the snot out of someone with boxing combos, slamming each other to the floor with a variety of takedowns (wich ain't gonna be healthy for the recipient), and doing their best to rip pieces off, choke each other out, and G&P once they're on the ground. In contrast we have the _majority_ of TMA people who spend their time doing touch-contact sparring, working their techniques, and performing what amounts to little more than a complex dance. The fact that their "rules" allow for eye, throat, and groin attacks is, IMO, pretty meaningless since they're usually going through the motions without the requisite "warrior-mindset." 



Andy Moynihan said:


> ...It's all about how bloody minded you're willing to be when the time comes.
> 
> There is many a black belt who is dead today because he had the technical proficiency to earn the blackness in his belt, but who, when the time came on the street, didn't have the necessary blackness in his HEART.


I like that!...I'm stealing it (with due credit of course )


----------



## cfr (Jun 15, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> As I've said in other threads, I think this is a very valid point. It seems that most of us accept that we will "fight the way we train." This being the case, I think that we have to concede that _most_ MMA'ers are going to be better prepared than _most_ TMA'ers simply because they train with a higher level of contact and intensity.
> They may be following their "rules," but their rules call for beating the snot out of someone with boxing combos, slamming each other to the floor with a variety of takedowns (wich ain't gonna be healthy for the recipient), and doing their best to rip pieces off, choke each other out, and G&P once they're on the ground. In contrast we have the _majority_ of TMA people who spend their time doing touch-contact sparring, working their techniques, and performing what amounts to little more than a complex dance. The fact that their "rules" allow for eye, throat, and groin attacks is, IMO, pretty meaningless since they're usually going through the motions without the requisite "warrior-mindset."


 
I personally don't have enough background in TMA to either agree or disagree. I would assume (possible quite incorrectly) there is a wide range of mindsets in the TMA arena, just like that of MMA.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 15, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> As I've said in other threads, I think this is a very valid point. It seems that most of us accept that we will "fight the way we train." This being the case, I think that we have to concede that _most_ MMA'ers are going to be better prepared than _most_ TMA'ers simply because they train with a higher level of contact and intensity.
> They may be following their "rules," but their rules call for beating the snot out of someone with boxing combos, slamming each other to the floor with a variety of takedowns (wich ain't gonna be healthy for the recipient), and doing their best to rip pieces off, choke each other out, and G&P once they're on the ground. In contrast we have the _majority_ of TMA people who spend their time doing touch-contact sparring, working their techniques, and performing what amounts to little more than a complex dance. The fact that their "rules" allow for eye, throat, and groin attacks is, IMO, pretty meaningless since they're usually going through the motions without the requisite "warrior-mindset."
> 
> 
> I like that!...I'm stealing it (with due credit of course )


 

Feel free to steal it (with due credit of course)


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

KenpoTex said:


> "You will NOT rise to the occasion, you will default to the level of training you have _mastered_."


 EXACTLY!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:


> Just for the record, I have not once said "you won't really fight how you train" or anything like it. A few of you seem to be suggesting that I diasagree with the "fight how you train" concept, that which I don't.
> 
> However, there seems to be a mindset that only MMA'ers will fall into this problem, and TMA'ers won't. Why is that?
> 
> ...


 I don't recall saying TMAer's wouldn't do the same.....if you've trained a crescent kick to solve all your problems, you'll keep trying it until taken to the ground and submitted if it fails.  Likewise, if you've never trained an eye-gouge, it's unlikely you'll suddenly innovate it in the middle of a fight.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

cfr said:


> This thread originated with "how to apply SD to an MMA'er", and my point all along has been to not assume an MMA'er will play by the rules on the street (seriously, go back and look and my first few replies). This was then met with "they will fight how they train", which got me on this tangent of "so will TMA'ers".


 What about 'everyone fights like they train' seems to have been missed?


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

Andy Moynihan said:


> So just go through your school/gym based training in your "off hours" and go through how you'd "spice up" what youve learned. It's all about how bloody minded you're willing to be when the time comes.
> 
> There is many a black belt who is dead today because he had the technical proficiency to earn the blackness in his belt, but who, when the time came on the street, didn't have the necessary blackness in his HEART when the time came on the street.


 HEAR, HEAR!  

R. Lee Ermey's drill instructor in 'Full Metal Jacket' 

'It's a hard-heart that kills!'

In order to destroy an enemy, you have to WANT to destroy an enemy!  Conflict is taking the heart and soul to a dark place.....good people reserve that darkness for only deserving special occassions, but anyone who truly wants to defend themselves against bad people have to learn to harness the darkness.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jun 16, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> HEAR, HEAR!
> 
> R. Lee Ermey's drill instructor in 'Full Metal Jacket'
> 
> ...


 

I should more properly have said, "when the time came on the street, couldn't summon up the necessary blackness in his heart" ("didn't have" implies it's "always on")

And should not have repeated "when the time came". One must not think and type at once.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 16, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> HEAR, HEAR!
> 
> R. Lee Ermey's drill instructor in 'Full Metal Jacket'
> 
> 'It's a hard-heart that kills!'


 
I guess we're playing the quote-game 

"I do not kill with my gun...I KILL WITH MY HEART!"  ~Roland Deschain "The Gunslinger" from Stephen King's _Dark Tower_ series.


----------



## PG Michael B (Jun 16, 2008)

Now remember, things look bad and it looks like you're not gonna make it, then you gotta get mean. I mean plumb, mad-dog mean. 'Cause if you lose your head and you give up then you neither live nor win. That's just the way it is. ~ Josey Wales


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

Guess I'll get back into the fray here...

I'm all for having the mindset/mental placement/blackness of heart etc... to fight like a pitbull and leave nothing out of bounds when the situation warrants it.

 But as to the "attack first" concept, many here would do well to remember that as far as the law in many places is concerned, being the first to launch an actual physical attack when only words or threats have been exchanged up to that point makes you guilty of assault. Especially if you display the level of ferocity being discussed here. If you use a weapon in said encounter and you attack first, it could be assault with a deadly weapon, or worse, attempted murder. Whoever it was that suggested "shoot them" should be aware that there can also be legal problems with shooting a lone attacker if they are unarmed, even if they initiate the physical attack. Also, once the threat is removed, (the attacker is retreating, or unconcious, or laying on the ground bleeding and not offering any more violence) you should stop your attack immediately.

I work with inmates in jails a lot, and I can tell you that many of them were only defending themselves from an attack, but since the attacker ended up worse off than them, they are the ones arrested. Especially if the other guy (or gal, I am not sexist) called the police first.

I was the one who suggested carrying weapons and using them, and I affirm that opinion. But it should be made clear that that is only in case you are actually physically attacked. It would be difficult to explain your actions to a police officer, if you were to bludgoen/stab/shoot someone simply for saying they were going to attack you, if they didn't actually do it. 

So my humble advice is, wait until you are actually attacked, and *then* beat them so they never forget it. And *always *be the first to call the police once the threat is ended. 

Always remember, as dangerous as street fights can be, jail fights are almost always worse...


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 16, 2008)

Perhaps you should look into a carry permit.verkill:


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

In california?

yeah, uhh...good luck with that.

I think it's the same in HI.


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 16, 2008)

allenjp said:


> In california?
> yeah, uhh...good luck with that.
> I think it's the same in HI.


YIKES!!
I didn't notice the location.

Perhaps a heavy purse.:drinky:


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 16, 2008)

allenjp said:


> Guess I'll get back into the fray here...
> So my humble advice is, wait until you are actually attacked, and *then* beat them so they never forget it. And *always *be the first to call the police once the threat is ended.


Most places "a reasonable fear for your life" is enough to use force to stop it.  I know each state's penal code is different, however, many have this concept expressed.

Waiting until your attacked isn't the best option, IMO.  You might just get cold conked.:bangahead:


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

kwaichang said:


> Most places "a reasonable fear for your life" is enough to use force to stop it. I know each state's penal code is different, however, many have this concept expressed.
> 
> Waiting until your attacked isn't the best option, IMO. You might just get cold conked.:bangahead:


 
This language is the exact problem with this kind of law. It is too ambiguous. What is "a reasonable fear" is up to the interpretation of the police and the jury. In California at least I have personal knowledge and experience that words alone most often will not do to reach that threshold.


----------



## kwaichang (Jun 16, 2008)

That's the problem with a too liberal legislature, IMO.  However, words don't cause damage; but if the person is holding something that can do damage, or is a MOOSE, why then the circumstances are quite different.
Better to be judged by twelve than to be carried by six.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 16, 2008)

allenjp said:


> This language is the exact problem with this kind of law. It is too ambiguous. What is "a reasonable fear" is up to the interpretation of the police and the jury. In California at least I have personal knowledge and experience that words alone most often will not do to reach that threshold.


There's a reason that justification of the use of force has not been quantified as black letter law.  Let's take the same bad guy; a 5' 10", 230 lb Hells Angel, about 25 years old.  No weapons displayed or involved (as unlikely as that is).  Now let's look at a couple of potential victims: a 22 year old US Navy SEAL, a 32 year old male typical "weekend warrior" in decent shape, a 42 year old MMA champion (think Randy Couture), a 45 year old female police officer who's also a competitive athlete, and a 75 year old retiree.  Each of them would be justified in using a different level of force against the same attack, like a grab and punch combo, from that biker...  Some may not be justified in using anything but empty hands, while others would be probably be justified in using lethal force!


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

kwaichang said:


> That's the problem with a too liberal legislature, IMO. However, words don't cause damage; but if the person is holding something that can do damage, or is a MOOSE, why then the circumstances are quite different.
> Better to be judged by twelve than to be carried by six.


 
You are preaching to the choir on this one, and everything I said in that post about laws assumes a lone and unarmed attacker. If he even displays a weapon in a threatening manner, by all means have at him. If there are more than one, than the law will usually justify your fear. *"USUALLY" *being the key word here. And in those situations where you decide to act, you should only ever mention to the police that you were deathly *afraid*. not angry, not justified in your actions, afraid and only afraid...for your life. Many times your actions and words after an altercation serve as the basis for judging your mental state at the time. And that is the thing of key importance-your mental state. That, and whether or not a "reasonable" person would have had the same fear under the same circumstances.

The other thing you must remember is that the police are NOT necessarily your friends here. They often make themselves out to seem that way to get you to talk, but they will then turn around and use what you tell them to convict you many times. 

Just what I have seen...


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> There's a reason that justification of the use of force has not been quantified as black letter law. Let's take the same bad guy; a 5' 10", 230 lb Hells Angel, about 25 years old. No weapons displayed or involved (as unlikely as that is). Now let's look at a couple of potential victims: a 22 year old US Navy SEAL, a 32 year old male typical "weekend warrior" in decent shape, a 42 year old MMA champion (think Randy Couture), a 45 year old female police officer who's also a competitive athlete, and a 75 year old retiree. Each of them would be justified in using a different level of force against the same attack, like a grab and punch combo, from that biker... Some may not be justified in using anything but empty hands, while others would be probably be justified in using lethal force!


 
All true, but what about the 32 year old computer programmer who doesn't practice any form of MA and while he may look physically able to defend himself, is just as likely as not to be killed by said 25 year biker behemoth? 

This is a much more likely scenario IMO...


----------



## MJS (Jun 16, 2008)

allenjp said:


> Guess I'll get back into the fray here...
> 
> I'm all for having the mindset/mental placement/blackness of heart etc... to fight like a pitbull and leave nothing out of bounds when the situation warrants it.
> 
> ...


 
Great post and I agree with pretty much everything.  The one thing that caught my eye was when you said to wait until you're attacked.  Personally, I'd rather not wait until the attack is half way to me, but instead to use a pre-emptive strike.  In other words, when the guy is drawing back to hit me, that is when I'm going to start my defense.  Will I be in the wrong?  Don't know, but frankly, at that point, the situation has escalated, I'm now in more fear for my well being, and am going to act. 

Mike


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 16, 2008)

allenjp said:


> All true, but what about the 32 year old computer programmer who doesn't practice any form of MA and while he may look physically able to defend himself, is just as likely as not to be killed by said 25 year biker behemoth?
> 
> This is a much more likely scenario IMO...


I tried to make up a reasonable cross section of people; I can't possibly come up with every single combination.  The hypothetical SEAL I included could have a serious injury impairing his ability to fight, or might be exhausted.  The 75 year old retiree I mentioned could be any of several highly respected, well known, and fantastically capable martial arts masters I know of, like Maasaki Hatsumi or Dr. M. Gyi (among others) who are more than capable of defending themselves.  The point I was trying to make is that there is no way to write a law that contemplates every possible combination of victim, attack, and attacker -- so the reasonableness of a particular use of force relies upon the articulation and explanation of the totality of the circumstances that surround it; what is reasonable in one set of circumstances would be completely unreasonable in another.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

MJS said:


> Great post and I agree with pretty much everything. The one thing that caught my eye was when you said to wait until you're attacked. Personally, I'd rather not wait until the attack is half way to me, but instead to use a pre-emptive strike. In other words, when the guy is drawing back to hit me, that is when I'm going to start my defense. Will I be in the wrong? Don't know, but frankly, at that point, the situation has escalated, I'm now in more fear for my well being, and am going to act.
> 
> Mike


 
Yeah, it's a tough one, I understand what you're saying. It's hard for me to know if I would be able to wait until attacked, but just know that those kinds of things ("preemptive strike") are exactly what they are looking for to get you in trouble, they often don't see you as the victim, just another person involved in violence, especially if you beat thet livin' hell out of the guy (which by the way I am in favor of). But you should at any rate try to be the first to call the police to report that HE assaulted YOU, and only ever say that you were afraid. Scared, afraid, terrorized. Never anything about being pissed, or justified in what you did. Only afraid...

I should add though that once he draws a fist back, or even moves toward you threateningly, that can be considered a sufficient show of intent to attack, it just depends on the officer that comes to investigate, and the jury you get if charges are filed. I am mainly talking about when there have been no physical moves yet, just talking and mild posturing. But everything is open to interpretation...


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> I tried to make up a reasonable cross section of people; I can't possibly come up with every single combination. The hypothetical SEAL I included could have a serious injury impairing his ability to fight, or might be exhausted. The 75 year old retiree I mentioned could be any of several highly respected, well known, and fantastically capable martial arts masters I know of, like Maasaki Hatsumi or Dr. M. Gyi (among others) who are more than capable of defending themselves. The point I was trying to make is that there is no way to write a law that contemplates every possible combination of victim, attack, and attacker -- so the reasonableness of a particular use of force relies upon the articulation and explanation of the totality of the circumstances that surround it; what is reasonable in one set of circumstances would be completely unreasonable in another.


 
I know whay the laws are written that way, because it's impossible to do it any other way for the reasons you mentioned. Problem comes because the people interpreting those laws that have authority over you currently are not the best ones to be making those decisions IMO.

I was just messin' wit ya, it's all good


----------



## MJS (Jun 16, 2008)

allenjp said:


> Yeah, it's a tough one, I understand what you're saying. It's hard for me to know if I would be able to wait until attacked, but just know that those kinds of things ("preemptive strike") are exactly what they are looking for to get you in trouble, they often don't see you as the victim, just another person involved in violence, especially if you beat thet livin' hell out of the guy (which by the way I am in favor of). But you should at any rate try to be the first to call the police to report that HE assaulted YOU, and only ever say that you were afraid. Scared, afraid, terrorized. Never anything about being pissed, or justified in what you did. Only afraid...
> 
> I should add though that once he draws a fist back, or even moves toward you threateningly, that can be considered a sufficient show of intent to attack, it just depends on the officer that comes to investigate, and the jury you get if charges are filed. I am mainly talking about when there have been no physical moves yet, just talking and mild posturing. But everything is open to interpretation...


 
And thats what sucks IMHO.  Someone makes physical threats to you.  You attempt to verbally defuse the situation.  It doesnt work.  Things get heated.  Opponent makes aggressive moves towards you....and the jury feels that we're supposed to wait until we get hit????  I wonder what the jury member would do if he/she were in a situation like that.  

I'm sorry, but I disagree with the jury, and IMO, I take that as a sign of aggression towards me.  Unless I had no brains, I'm not going to stand there and wait until the punch, kick or whatever else they may be doing, is half way to my face or body.  

Now, as you said in your closing paragraph, if there is no aggressive moes towards you, and its simply posturing and verbal comments, I don't think you should haul off and clock the guy....as tempting as it is.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 16, 2008)

MJS said:


> And thats what sucks IMHO. Someone makes physical threats to you. You attempt to verbally defuse the situation. It doesnt work. Things get heated. Opponent makes aggressive moves towards you....and the jury feels that we're supposed to wait until we get hit???? I wonder what the jury member would do if he/she were in a situation like that.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I disagree with the jury, and IMO, I take that as a sign of aggression towards me. Unless I had no brains, I'm not going to stand there and wait until the punch, kick or whatever else they may be doing, is half way to my face or body.
> 
> Now, as you said in your closing paragraph, if there is no aggressive moes towards you, and its simply posturing and verbal comments, I don't think you should haul off and clock the guy....as tempting as it is.


 
That's the exact problem I think is that most jurors will not have had to face a situation like that. It's the same problem I have when I argue the futility of gun control laws that are too restrictive. When I hypothesize about that person being attacked by someone, many times I get answers like "Well that wouldn't happen to me because I wouldn't be in a place where thaings like that happen" or "In my whole life of 40 something years I have never had a situation like that" or even worse "If I am in a situation like that I would rather them kill me than me kill them". It is precisely that kind of thinking that makes them think that even if you were the one attacked, you probably did something to deserve it in the first place. Even if just by your very presence in the place where the altercation ocurred.

And I haven't even covered the situation where the police lie to convict you, yes I have seen it happen, and just try to get a juror to believe your word over that of a police officer...


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 16, 2008)

The concept of preemptive self defense has been discussed several times previously (check among these threads, for example), and I'd be happy to discuss it again.  (In brief, yes, you can generally defend yourself before you get hit -- but you have to articulate why very carefully.)  But, it's pretty far off topic for this thread, so if you want to do so, let's either start a new thread, or revive one of the previous ones.


----------



## MJS (Jun 17, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> The concept of preemptive self defense has been discussed several times previously (check among these threads, for example), and I'd be happy to discuss it again. (In brief, yes, you can generally defend yourself before you get hit -- but you have to articulate why very carefully.) But, it's pretty far off topic for this thread, so if you want to do so, let's either start a new thread, or revive one of the previous ones.


 

New thread here.  We can reserve this thread for the original discussion. 

Mike


----------



## MJS (Jun 17, 2008)

allenjp said:


> That's the exact problem I think is that most jurors will not have had to face a situation like that. It's the same problem I have when I argue the futility of gun control laws that are too restrictive. When I hypothesize about that person being attacked by someone, many times I get answers like "Well that wouldn't happen to me because I wouldn't be in a place where thaings like that happen" or "In my whole life of 40 something years I have never had a situation like that" or even worse "If I am in a situation like that I would rather them kill me than me kill them". It is precisely that kind of thinking that makes them think that even if you were the one attacked, you probably did something to deserve it in the first place. Even if just by your very presence in the place where the altercation ocurred.
> 
> And I haven't even covered the situation where the police lie to convict you, yes I have seen it happen, and just try to get a juror to believe your word over that of a police officer...


 
I hear ya!   I think this discussion is important and I'd be happy to hear more in the other thread I started.


----------

