# Standing wristlocks



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 21, 2016)

Just a little theory regarding standing wristlocks  that I haven't seen expressed by too many people.

Standing wristlocks are widely denigrated among a certain segment of martial artists. They don't seem to work in MMA*. They don't seem to work reliably in live sparring against a skilled opponent, regardless of the rules.** The natural conclusion for many seems to be that these are moves which rely on a compliant uke feeding just the right kind of energy. If not that, perhaps they depend on a practitioner having a ridiculously high skill level compared to the opponent.

On the other hand, I've spoken to police officers, correctional officers, and bouncers who have used standing wristlocks effectively in real situations. One of the COs ( a friend of mine) isn't even a trained martial artist. What's going on? If my non-martial artist friend can make a move work on a violent inmate, why can't an aikido master pull off the same move against a low-level amateur MMA fighter?

To find the answer to that, let's back up and ask another question. What's the one technique which wins more street fights than any other move, but is never seen in the MMA cage or in normal sparring?

Answer - the sucker punch. You want to win a street fight? Hit someone while their attention is elsewhere or while they're posturing and woofing, building up to a fight but not fully committed to swinging yet. You don't have that opportunity in a MMA fight, but it's common in the real world.

My thesis is that standing joint locks are the grapplers equivalent of the sucker punch. You don't use them against an opponent who is in a fighting stance throwing jabs and crosses at you. You apply them against someone who grabs or shoves you as intimidation before making up his mind to really stop punches. You apply them on an unruly inmate/suspect/patron who is occupied arguing or wrestling with one of your fellow CO/LEO/bouncers while you come up from the side. You apply them to someone who is trying to resist being moved somewhere but isn't necessarily swinging at you yet. You apply them to someone who either isn't fully focused on you or who isn't yet in 100% fight mode - just like a sucker punch.

If you accept this idea, then the next question is, why bother? If you have the opportunity for a free shot, why not use it to just punch the guy or tackle him to the ground? I'd suggest that there are times when having the option for controlling someone without striking them or going to the ground is a good thing - especially for the professions I mentioned above.

Disclaimer - I have spent quite a few years practicing standing wristlocks, but have never used one in a real fight. This is just based on my conversations with people who have used them in real life. I welcome feedback from LEOs or anyone else who has real world experience with this class of technique.


*(I've seen a couple of broken arms in MMA from standing armlocks, but no standing wristlocks.)

**(There is one kind of standing wristlock that has been used effectively by a few competitors in BJJ against an opponent who has a lapel grip. You have to apply it quickly, so it tends to result in broken wrists before people can tap. I'm not aware of any form of sparring or competition that includes strikes where standing wristlocks are commonly seen.)


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 21, 2016)

Whenever I have applied any form of 'come along' hold (to include wristlocks) on non-compliant people, they were impaired in some manner, generally by alcohol.  Their reflexes, timing, and judgment were almost always impaired to some extent, as well as their ability to resist arrest.  Their reach may have exceeded their grasp, but it did not exceed a shiny set of Peerless hand irons.


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 21, 2016)

I could see someone pulling off a _kote gaeshi_, on someone in sparring if it wasn't expected.  Trouble is it would be rather dangerous to train and likely lead to a fair number of ER visits, as would most joint attacks being used as a takedown.

But anyways, I think people get there ideas of "self-defence" all buggered up and think it's only one thing.

There is a difference between a one-on-one street fight and someone being a drunk idiot and using a little physical restraint.  There is a difference between those and a armed police officer or security guard restraining someone that isn't so much fighting as resisting arrest.  Both those are very different then an armed attacker trying to do serious damage and different still from a group attacking a individual.

Different things are going to work in different situations.

Sometimes I think it is easy to get caught up in the sport fighting mindset.  It is a very effective testing ground, we know with pretty good certainty what works and what doesn't in that environment, we test it every day against full resistance.  We got high level competition footage showing it in action.  We know it works because we see it working.

It gets a little fuzzier with the things we can't train with full resistance, and to be fair some things aren't meant to be used against someone resisting 100%.  Some things are meant to work on a drunk that needs removed from a location, some are designed to restrain a person that isn't even fighting you but needs to be controlled.  Sometimes it just needs a step above a firm voice to assert control.

What I do think is good is to preparation in case things escalate.  If that come along fails and it turns into a fight it would be good to be ready.  But the things outside of sport rules, like escorting a person out a door while useful to some will never find their way into sport rules.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Mar 21, 2016)

Used standing wrist locks in my days in security and they worked for me, but then, as stated by Tony, they were not throwing punches when I applied them


----------



## drop bear (Mar 21, 2016)

Having two people going for the wristlock makes a difference.

Being stronger than the other guy makes a difference.

Otherwise learn to apply them from a dominant clinch.  Because then they are less able to hit you.

The wrist lock for me, worked about as well as just securing the arm.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 21, 2016)

Xue Sheng said:


> Used standing wrist locks in my days in security and they worked for me, but then, as stated by Tony, they were not throwing punches when I applied them



It's not to say that some of the Marines I applied wrist locks to didn't TRY to punch me, but they were persuaded that this was not the wisest choice of action.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 21, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> You don't use them against an opponent who is in a fighting stance throwing jabs and crosses at you.


This is just based on my experience of being able to use a wrist lock to deal with punches.

My understanding is that when dealing with punches, one has to first deal with the punch before applying the wrist lock.  



Tony Dismukes said:


> There is one kind of standing wristlock that has been used effectively by a few competitors in BJJ against an opponent who has a lapel grip. You have to apply it quickly, so it tends to result in broken wrists before people can tap. I'm not aware of any form of sparring or competition that includes strikes where standing wristlocks are commonly seen.


 Breaking the wrist is the real purpose of a wrist lock.  The control comes after the wrist is broken.  This is why Chin Na. joint locks are dangerous because they were meant to be done quickly and cause damage.  This is also why you never see a demo of Chin Na techniques done at full speed or resistance. When I practice Chin Na with students I always tell them don't resist because that resistance may cause more damage when I start manipulating that joint. At least if they aren't resisting, then I can go slow enough without worrying that I may accidentally move faster than my ability to control and break their wrist.

Wrist locks are also like punches, you don't want your opponent to know it's coming until it's already there.  From a kung fu perspective, I should never know that you are trying to lock my joint until it's too late.


----------



## MAfreak (Mar 21, 2016)

quite difficult to catch punching hands. thats what i wrote in about every third post here in the forums and no one wanted to know about that. but it totally works if someone does grappling too, which also can happen to officers and bouncers.

i personally got taken down by a standing wristlock in a soft sparring match (so unscripted) against a ju jutsu guy (but we did more submission grappling, than punching there).
and i personally used a standing wristlock in a "real" situation, when an old man grabbed an arm of his wife and punched her in the face with his other hand. i didn't want to beat up that old guy, even if he deserved it, so i used a "figure four" wristlock to make him let go of his wife.

so i say it is possible and effective, as long as the wrist you want to lock, doesn't move all the time like in fistfights.


----------



## WaterGal (Mar 21, 2016)

I really can't "like" this enough.  Definitely, different techniques are useful for different situations.  Not all situations call for punching someone in the head.  If, for example, I'm out at a bar and some guy tries to cop a feel, I _could _punch him, but a wrist lock on the offending hand will probably both be more likely to make him let go and less likely to result in him trying to hit me back.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 21, 2016)

MAfreak said:


> quite difficult to catch punching hands. thats what i wrote in about every third post here in the forums and no one wanted to know about that. but it totally works if someone does grappling too, which also can happen to officers and bouncers.
> 
> i personally got taken down by a standing wristlock in a soft sparring match (so unscripted) against a ju jutsu guy (but we did more submission grappling, than punching there).
> and i personally used a standing wristlock in a "real" situation, when an old man grabbed an arm of his wife and punched her in the face with his other hand. i didn't want to beat up that old guy, even if he deserved it, so i used a "figure four" wristlock to make him let his wife go.
> ...


yeah just don't try to do one on a 1-2 combination punch. lol.  The fights that I've been in were usually trying to throw power punches and I like those because I can usually get someone to overextend.  It's the fast jabs that come in series like you state that I don't bother trying to locking.  Sort of like everything else, there's a right time and a wrong time to apply a wrist lock. Like the first guy in the video. Wrist lock isn't going to be the best option.  For stuff like that my plan would be to use my elbows to break his hands.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 21, 2016)

I think it's important to note WHY wrist locks work so well for law enforcement and security personnel; Those people are authority figures and typically when they restrain you, you tend to comply, also police will cuff, mace, taze, or shoot someone before applying a wrist lock. Also more than one cop can be involved. I've seen cops apply wrist locks while the assailant was cuffed with another cop putting his knee on the perp's neck.

Wrist locks also work fine for bouncers because they tend to be pretty big guys, and can restrain smaller people with relative ease. If a bigger guy gets out of line, more than one bouncer will restrain him.

The type of wrist locks people tend to question are those Aikido, Hapkido, and Kung Fu wrist locks that are "magically" applied by small men or women as a huge person throws a punch at them.

As for sucker punches and MMA, people do get one punch KO'd.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Mar 21, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I think it's important to note WHY wrist locks work so well for law enforcement and security personnel; Those people are authority figures and typically when they restrain you, you tend to comply, also police will cuff, mace, taze, or shoot someone before applying a wrist lock. Also more than one cop can be involved. I've seen cops apply wrist locks while the assailant was cuffed with another cop putting his knee on the perp's neck.
> 
> Wrist locks also work fine for bouncers because they tend to be pretty big guys, and can restrain smaller people with relative ease. If a bigger guy gets out of line, more than one bouncer will restrain him.
> 
> ...



Ever had to deal with a bleeding heroin addict without a Taser, cuffs, mace or a gun. Ever had to deal with a person brought in on a mental heath warrant without Taser, cuffs, mace or a gun...I have...wrist locks worked when needed then...I think it is important to note that you are likely talking from lack of experience... again.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 21, 2016)

Xue Sheng said:


> Ever had to deal with a bleeding heroin addict without a Taser, cuffs, mace or a gun. Ever had to deal with a person brought in on a mental heath warrant without Taser, cuffs, mace or a gun...I have...wrist locks worked when needed then...I think it is important to note that you are likely talking from lack of experience... again.



Where did I say that wrist locks don't work as a restraint? I said that where the effectiveness of wrist locks is questioned is from demos of people catching strikes (possibly throwing them from that caught strike) and immediately applying a wrist lock.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 21, 2016)

When you lock on your opponent wrist, he can raise his elbow to release your pressure. The elbow lock and shoulder lock are much better.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 21, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> As for sucker punches and MMA, people do get one punch KO'd.


A one-punch KO in the ring or cage is not a sucker punch. Both parties are focused on their opponent and aware that they are in a fight.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 21, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> A one-punch KO in the ring or cage is not a sucker punch. Both parties are focused on their opponent and aware that they are in a fight.



Fair enough.


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 21, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you lock on your opponent wrist, he can raise his elbow to release your pressure. The elbow lock and shoulder lock are much better.



I don't think you've ever been properly wrist locked to be perfectly honest...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 21, 2016)

Andrew Green said:


> I don't think you've ever been properly wrist locked to be perfectly honest...


If you know the 3 separate directions of the wrist lock,

- vertical,
- horizontal,
- pull,

you will know what I'm talking about.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Mar 21, 2016)

Joint locks work just fine. The problem is that many people keep trying to use a screwdriver as a hammer.
Joint minipulation work well when used as they were intended within the context they were intended.
It's less about a "sucker punch" and more about appropriate context.


----------



## Langenschwert (Mar 22, 2016)

Well, the problem with wrist locks is that the point of breaking the wrist is past the point of some folks' pain compliance threshold. If you have to use one "for real", then you might break the wrist before the bad guy thinks about saying uncle. But I suppose, that's a "him" problem and not a "you" problem. 

However, they certainly work in context. In my albeit limited experience, there are some people who are just plain good at wrist locks, just like some people have a wickedly fast jab, and some people have a really good power double. If you're good at wrist locks, awesome. One of the guys in my club is just fantastic at them. I'm not that guy.


----------



## MAfreak (Mar 22, 2016)

@Kung Fu Wang no, just no.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Mar 22, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> The type of wrist locks people tend to question are those Aikido, Hapkido, and Kung Fu wrist locks that are "magically" applied by small men or women as a huge person throws a punch at them.


They seem to work OK with not much training on gun toting ice-cream robbers:


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 22, 2016)

hoshin1600 said:


> Joint locks work just fine. The problem is that many people keep trying to use a screwdriver as a hammer.
> Joint minipulation work well when used as they were intended within the context they were intended.
> It's less about a "sucker punch" and more about appropriate context.


Well,I was suggesting that using standing wristlocks as a sort of "grappling sucker punch" _is_ an appropriate context for that tool - one in which they have been demonstrated to work.

What other context(s) would you suggest are appropriate for using standing wristlocks?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 22, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I think it's important to note WHY wrist locks work so well for law enforcement and security personnel; Those people are authority figures and typically when they restrain you, you tend to comply, also police will cuff, mace, taze, or shoot someone before applying a wrist lock. *Also more than one cop can be involved. I've seen cops apply wrist locks while the assailant was cuffed with another cop putting his knee on the perp's neck*.



Where are you from?  Authority figures getting more respect?  There is a total lack of respect or there would not be a reason to apply wrist or other locks. 

And how do you cuff someone with out some type of prior restraint?

As to the bolded statement, this seems to be an agenda in many of your posts.  I'm sorry if you had such an experience without any reason.  There are bad cops, there are impatient cops, and there are a lot of good cops who want to be fair and proper, but mostly just want to go home at the end of their shift.  They will not inflict pain or injury just because they can.  They will not use restraint unless a perp gives them a reason or department procedure requires it.



Hanzou said:


> Wrist locks also work fine for bouncers because they tend to be pretty big guys, and can restrain smaller people with relative ease. If a bigger guy gets out of line, more than one bouncer will restrain him..



Well, why would that not be so?  Is a bouncer, or a cop for that matter, in a sporting contest where injury is unlikely?  Or in a Marquis de Queensbury rules street encounter?  Should not bouncers especially (but cops as well) not prefer to use only the restraint necessary for compliance? 

But it is not necessary to be a big guy to properly apply joint locking techniques.  Good skill, yes.



Hanzou said:


> The type of wrist locks people tend to question are those Aikido, Hapkido, and Kung Fu wrist locks that are "magically" applied by small men or women as a huge person throws a punch at them..



"People tend to question?"  How much company do you need to make a statement?  How about you, do you also question the ability of a skilled Aikido, Hapkido, or Kung Fu MA to apply wrist locks effectively?  If so, I would have to guess you haven't met skilled practitioners, or they were being very gentle with you.  I know in the Hapkido I learned, size meant nothing when applying or resisting a properly applied technique.  If your experience has been otherwise, I would consider that your loss as you haven't really met skilled practitioners who could properly teach you joint locks.. 

I do not mean to say a super strong person, knowing what was coming, might no be able to resist.  But normally an opponent would not be able to guess ahead of time what technique was about to be applied.

@Tony Dismukes  and others.  One thing I haven't seen here is a definition of what wrist lock is being discussed.  That makes comments too easy to misunderstand.  I was taught many wrist locks.  Some are or can be pain compliance techniques for control only.  Others are used to damage an opponent's joint(s) and would likely be followed by strikes, takedowns, throws, cuts, etc.

So I guess I should really ask, what type of wrist lock(s) did you mean Tony Dismukes?



Hanzou said:


> As for sucker punches and MMA, people do get one punch KO'd.



As already pointed out, that would not be a sucker punch.

Also, I don't mean any disrespect to anyone, their opinions, or their MA.  I only say that no MA is any good without skill on the part of the practitioner, and that on any day, any martial artist may have a very bad day, and his opponent may have a very good day.  Those things all have to be taken into consideration before one decides to put down another MA in broad terms.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 22, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> So I guess I should really ask, what type of wrist lock(s) did you mean Tony Dismukes?



I'm thinking about the entire family of standing wristlocks. (I distinguish the standing versions from the same techniques applied on the ground because you can control the body and isolate the joint more easily on the ground.)



oftheherd1 said:


> I know in the Hapkido I learned, size meant nothing when applying or resisting a properly applied technique. If your experience has been otherwise, I would consider that your loss as you haven't really met skilled practitioners who could properly teach you joint locks..



Once you have a technically perfect wristlock all the way sunk in, then it negates a lot of size and strength. The problem comes with getting it applied in the first place on a stronger, non-compliant opponent who is actively trying to harm you and also prevent you from controlling him.

As an example, consider a standard outwards twisting wristlock (call it kote gaeshi or omote gyaku or whatever your style names it). Typically you start by compromising your opponent's balance, then you weaken their structure (get their arm extended and off center thereby weakening their connection to their core), then get their wrist flexed and then twisted to the outside, all the while maintaining your own structure and balance and avoiding counterattacks.

Once you've reached that end point, your opponent's strength has been mostly neutralized. The problem is that their strength can make every step leading up to that more difficult. When you work to take their balance, they can use their strength to mess with _your_ balance. When you try to weaken their structure by extending their arm, they can use their strength to yank it back. When you try to flex their wrist (especially if you haven't already managed to compromise their balance and structure) they can use their strength to hold their wrist rigidly in its natural straight position. (Not to mention pummeling you with their free hand if you haven't already captured their balance, compromised their structure, and broken the alignment of their wrist.)

I'm not saying it's impossible to overcome all that with sufficient technique. I'm just saying that relative strength is still a factor at least up until the very end of the lock. Applying the technique as a "sucker punch" greatly increases your chance of getting it sunk in before they start using their strength or other attributes against you.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 22, 2016)

*I have used wrist locks, come a long techniques in the past while working.*  They work just fine when used appropriately.  As mentioned above they work great when someone is not mentally sound or they are inebriated, etc.  They work great when used in a surprise fashion.  They also work just fine when you *first light someone up* and they are fuzzy in their head and again surprised and not expecting it.  You just have to use them at the right time and place.  *Just like everything else!*


----------



## Spinedoc (Mar 22, 2016)

Wristlocks can be very effective, but they have to either be used with an element of surprise, such as surprise nikyo (is there another kind?) OR with proper technique. Just applying a Kotegaeshi to someone resisting isn't going to work. You have to unbalance them first. You have to get them to either overcommit to the attack, IE; Chudan Tsuki with a tenkan..you actually allow the punch to pass and brush it by...(you're NOT going to catch a fast punch at speed in mid air, that's Hollywood nonsense), and then apply an extension force to the forearm, sliding your arm down into position as you tenkan. Basically you get them unbalanced forward, and then tenkan getting them to spin, now, while they are still unbalance, you apply the kotegaeshi.

Same with other wristlocks. Yokomenuchi Shihonage (similar motion to a roundhouse punch)...you tenshin or move out of the way, forcing uke to extend to try and reach you, as they do, you step in, apply ATEMI striking them in the face, while you use your other arm to grab the wrist AT IT'S FULLEST EXTENSION...not before, and then while they are unbalanced leaning forward, your atemi causes them to unbalance backwards, and you apply the shihonage WHILE they are still unbalanced...

Bottom line is, wristlocks work fine if you unbalance your opponent first...if you allow uke to regain his balance and center, then you have to do something else.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 22, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> The problem comes with getting it applied in the first place on a stronger, non-compliant opponent who is actively trying to harm you and also prevent you from controlling him.


 Think of it like this.   When you are fighting someone, do you tell them then when you are are going to punch or kick and where? Wrists locks are like that.  The are applied when the opponent is least ready for it.  My hand can be one someones wrist but without having the intent of a wrist lock.  Then when the moment comes I can apply it.  Or my hand can quickly apply the wrist lock at the moment my hand touches the wrist.



Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm just saying that relative strength is still a factor at least up until the very end of the lock.


Only the grip needs to be strong. The stronger the grip, the better you'll be able to handle someone who is physically stronger.  The good thing is that most people, including the big strong guys, have weak wrists.


----------



## MAfreak (Mar 22, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> They seem to work OK with not much training on gun toting ice-cream robbers:



because someone holding a gun in front of you isn't moving that arm. unlike punching.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Mar 22, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> As an example, consider a standard outwards twisting wristlock (call it kote gaeshi or omote gyaku or whatever your style names it). Typically you start by compromising your opponent's balance, then you weaken their structure (get their arm extended and off center thereby weakening their connection to their core), then get their wrist flexed and then twisted to the outside, all the while maintaining your own structure and balance and avoiding counterattacks.


maybe this is part of the problem, you dont need those first steps to do the joint manipulation.
joint manipulations are similar to single or double leg take downs. they need to be done quick and with precision and as Tony said with a degree of surprise.  if i crawled around the mat on all fours trying to grab your legs over and over again and thats the way everyone was taught to do a double leg take down, everyone would agree "they dont work"



Tony Dismukes said:


> What other context(s) would you suggest are appropriate for using standing wristlocks?


i agree with your premise that a wrist lock can be compared to a sucker punch, but as someone else pointed out "why bother, just punch him" . so i was trying to give a broader definition.  the question of why do a wrist lock and not a punch is a key question and the answer is context and situation.
police and to a lessor extant bouncers are not allowed to punch and are trying to gain compliance (not win a fight)  so that is one valid context.

 

and then there is this context.
  imagine him with a weapon malfunction and coming at you with a knife.  punches are not going to do much and your first priority is to secure the knife. to me this was the original context and purpose of joint manipulations and control. they are as valid today as they were 1000 years ago. through out history societies acknowledged the human weakness and created protective gear. thus the combative behavior takes this into account and tries to counter.  large portions of modern martial arts were never actually combatives but rather a combative sport.  punching is a staple in martial arts but in true combatives punching is as worthless as waving your finger at them and telling them "your going to get a time out mister".  
 both blunt force and edge weapons are a fact of life in true combat.  they create a disparity of force with a multiplying factor.  the tactics and approach to weapons based combatives is not the same a combative sports.  joint manipulations become a primary tactic in this context.


----------



## Buka (Mar 22, 2016)

A wristlock thread, yay!  A lot to talk about IMO. I've been training them for a long time, have used them in several jobs I've had, and have taught some versions of them in DT to cops. I'm at work, be back to this thread tonight.

As for catching an incoming punch with one, nah. I suppose it's been done, just like landing a large commercial airliner safely atop the Hudson river has been done, but not really a good way to go.

As for defense against a knife - I've never been talented enough to do that, so haven't really thought of them in that way.


----------



## elder999 (Mar 22, 2016)

Buka said:


> As for defense against a knife - I've never been talented enough to do that, so haven't really thought of them in that way.



It's all in the context, not in talent.....a matter of timing really.

I've used "standing wristlocks" against people trying to deploy weapons on several occasions: they *want* to get that knife out of their pocket or sheath. They *want* to get that gun out. They *want* to use that stick. 

A  successful defense employs their _intended_ motion against them, with some added body positioning,

Otherwise, sure: stronger, cop, bouncer, yada, yadda, yadda....carry on.


----------



## Buka (Mar 22, 2016)

elder999 said:


> It's all in the context, not in talent.....a matter of timing really.
> 
> I've used "standing wristlocks" against people trying to deploy weapons on several occasions: they *want* to get that knife out of their pocket or sheath. They *want* to get that gun out. They *want* to use that stick.
> 
> ...



Oh, yes, agreed, I have as well.(but it wasn't a weapon, it was an ID) I meant once the knife was out.


----------



## elder999 (Mar 22, 2016)

Buka said:


> Oh, yes, agreed, I have as well.(but it wasn't a weapon, it was an ID)* I meant once the knife was out*.



Yeah-once the knife is out, shoot them.....or hit 'em with the cane-most of these days, I've got the cane-it'll be in my hand....I'm  practicing  "hit 'em with the cane and *then* shoot 'em,"but really hoping that I never get to try it out......


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 22, 2016)

elder999 said:


> Yeah-once the knife is out, shoot them.....or hit 'em with the cane-most of these days, I've got the cane-it'll be in my hand....I'm  practicing  "hit 'em with the cane and *then* shoot 'em,"but really hoping that I never get to try it out......


Yeah but, ya don't ever see that in the Octagon so, ya know, it doesn't actually work, and stuff...


----------



## drop bear (Mar 22, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> Where are you from? Authority figures getting more respect? There is a total lack of respect or there would not be a reason to apply wrist or other locks.
> 
> And how do you cuff someone with out some type of prior restraint?
> 
> As to the bolded statement, this seems to be an agenda in many of your posts. I'm sorry if you had such an experience without any reason. There are bad cops, there are impatient cops, and there are a lot of good cops who want to be fair and proper, but mostly just want to go home at the end of their shift. They will not inflict pain or injury just because they can. They will not use restraint unless a perp gives them a reason or department procedure requires it.



My experience has been that people don't really want to fight the cops even if they are resisting them. Too many consequences.

I have fought cuffs on to people. And I have seen people just allow themselves to be cuffed. So there is a spectrum there.

Good hammerlocks work well if you don't break the arm.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 22, 2016)

Buka said:


> A wristlock thread, yay!  A lot to talk about IMO. I've been training them for a long time, have used them in several jobs I've had, and have taught some versions of them in DT to cops. I'm at work, be back to this thread tonight.
> 
> As for catching an incoming punch with one, nah. I suppose it's been done, just like landing a large commercial airliner safely atop the Hudson river has been done, but not really a good way to go.
> 
> As for defense against a knife - I've never been talented enough to do that, so haven't really thought of them in that way.



Standing wrist locks and weapons defence work almost exactly the same. And you do increase the percentages the same.

So it is more likely to work if you have numbers and have snuck up on the guy.

Punching defence to wrist locks is helped by good clinching.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Mar 22, 2016)

another set back in the discussion might be the one dimensional view of what a wrist lock should look like and the end result.  sometimes its only to twist and "pull up the slack" in the arm so you can bash the elbow joint or radial nerve with a blunt object in order to release a weapon


----------



## Buka (Mar 22, 2016)

Wrist locks are great, but not all the time, as in - they're not suitable for all circumstances. I know that can be said for any technique, but it's more so for wrist locks. Obviously, you have to have good technique. But even then, not all things are equal. I'm 142 pounds, some of you guys are much bigger and stronger than me, and would have more opportunity applying various wrist locks against me than I would probably have against you.

I always taught my cops that when someone was being violent you had to stop the violence before you could apply any kind of hold, especially a wrist lock. Exceptions? Sure, but it's usually part of the bigger/stronger equation than the other way around. And cops don't get as much training as you and I do, they get what they get, and usually learn more from other cops they work the street with.

I know a lot of different wrist/arm locks, but I don't know any of their names. Neither do any cops I taught, many of whom have used them successfully and often, and have so for many years. You might wonder why, how that can be. It has to do with filling out your reports and the likelihood of going to court. If your report states "I applied a _kote gaeshi _to the suspect etc ect" the defense counsel is going to tear you a new one. He'll start with mispronouncing it, see if you correct him, ask you if you're a martial arts master, etc etc, where you learned this kote gaeshi and if that term is listed in your department's manual, which he already has a copy of. And it can go downhill from there. What you would write was "I took him down etc". When asked how, you would say "with a take down I was taught in Defensive Tactics."
(I borrowed the term from Andrew Green's post. Thanks, Andrew.) 

I first learned wrist locks in a D.T. class in 76, long before I was a cop. A friend was teaching and had me take the class. He purposely never mentioned their name (for reasons stated), especially their name in a language other than English. I never paid attention to names since that day. It worked out well for me. And those I taught. And when I taught my students in my dojo, I still didn't call them by name. My students are familiar with a lot of wrist locks. If you ask them which ones, they'll say, "This one and that one and the one over there" as they demonstrate on their own wrists.  That may sound crazy to some. I don't care. 

JowGaWolf,  on "Breaking the wrist is the real purpose of a wrist lock." Every art is different, every job, too. Okay in Kung Fu, (and more power to you, brother) but it's not in Law Enforcement and not in American Karate. It's an option,sure_, _but not the purpose. Control and/or pain compliance is the purpose for us.

I've used several different standing locks in my life. Couple arm drags, outside wrist lock take down, several goose neck come alongs and I even used a bent elbow wrist lock when I was a cop and walked a guy across the street in a low squat walk (him, not me)  He was a young chump who was nice enough to put both his hands on my shoulders like a dad talking to his kid, while I was telling him to leave the property he was on. We were on camera and I just couldn't resist. It was either that or place him under arrest and I didn't want to do that as I was going off duty in fifteen minutes. 

We used to train two guys coming up behind an unsuspecting person. We would grab the upper arms as we kneed his legs out from under him - and apply goose necks to his wrists. It was easy because when their legs go out from under them, they lose spacial reference as well as balance and their arms go on vacation for a second. Did that one once with my partner.  It was great. It really sucks when there's a goose neck on each wrist. It's a helpless and scary feeling for the person. Kind of fun when you're doing it, though.

The pic below was on my dojo wall for a few years. Under it was written "Wrist lock this." That was me with one of my teachers, Joe Lewis. I was assisting him in a seminar. (on joint locks in self defense) We didn't pose, he just grabbed me and launched me into the wall as he was talking about getting grabbed by surprise and suddenly being a beat behind. I actually tried to stun him with my left hand a half second after this photo was taken - which he was waiting for (duh) - he kicked my feet out from under me (which were dangling off the floor) and threw my upper body down in the opposite direction. I went like a pin wheel. Thank God he stopped my head from bouncing off the floor.
Joe had hands and wrists like a stone mason. You weren't going to wrist lock him with anything, even if you were as strong as him.






I spent a good amount of time with Wally Jay over the years. He had such a smooth application of joint locks to the wrists, elbows, shoulders and fingers.  (He was very cool, too) He always told me the same thing. "They are not for every situation, but when the situation and opportunity are there, you should know how to apply them quickly. And what to do after they're on."


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (Mar 23, 2016)

I look at wrist locks as another tool to add to your toolbox. Catching or deflecting a strike with the intent of applying a wrist lock is quite hard to do and probably is the main reason you don't see it happen in mma. On another note they can be applicable when people are grabbing you in a grappling match or a self defense street scenario. 






A goal is not always meant to be reached, it often serves simply as something to aim at.  (Bruce Lee)


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 23, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> They seem to work OK with not much training on gun toting ice-cream robbers:



As was mentioned earlier, there's a difference between someone pointing a gun at you, and someone throwing multiple punches at you. I have yet to see anyone consistently snatch a punch out of the air and apply a wrist lock.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 23, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> Where are you from?  Authority figures getting more respect?  There is a total lack of respect or there would not be a reason to apply wrist or other locks.



I disagree. In general people are more likely to comply to a law enforcement officer than some random joe on the street. That translates into people respecting the badge. Is that always the case? No. However, as Dropbear stated, most people simply don't want to deal with the repercussions of messing around with a cop, and will typically listen to what they tell them to do. 



> And how do you cuff someone with out some type of prior restraint?



I was cuffed without a restraint when I was a teenager. A cop told me to turn around and place my hands behind my back. He promptly cuffed me and put me in the back of a cruiser. No prior restraint necessary. 



> Well, why would that not be so?  Is a bouncer, or a cop for that matter, in a sporting contest where injury is unlikely?  Or in a Marquis de Queensbury rules street encounter?  Should not bouncers especially (but cops as well) not prefer to use only the restraint necessary for compliance?
> 
> But it is not necessary to be a big guy to properly apply joint locking techniques.  Good skill, yes.



I have no clue what you're talking about here. I was simply stating that its easier for larger guys to apply wrist or joint locks on smaller people. Bouncers tend to be of the larger variety.



> "People tend to question?"  How much company do you need to make a statement?  How about you, do you also question the ability of a skilled Aikido, Hapkido, or Kung Fu MA to apply wrist locks effectively?  If so, I would have to guess you haven't met skilled practitioners, or they were being very gentle with you.  I know in the Hapkido I learned, size meant nothing when applying or resisting a properly applied technique.  If your experience has been otherwise, I would consider that your loss as you haven't really met skilled practitioners who could properly teach you joint locks..



I've met my fair share of "skilled" practitioners who couldn't replicate their demo abilities in a live situation. You're also repeating the same silliness I see from many of those styles which makes me question their grounding in reality. Saying nonsense like "size doesn't matter" doesn't help your case. Size ALWAYS matters. Anyone who says otherwise has simply watched too many Kung Fu movies. Size and strength can very quickly overcome skill, and you have to be a highly skilled small person to overcome a moderately skilled larger person.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 23, 2016)

elder999 said:


> It's all in the context, not in talent.....a matter of timing really.
> 
> *I've used "standing wristlocks" against people trying to deploy weapons on several occasions: they want to get that knife out of their pocket or sheath. They want to get that gun out. They want to use that stick.
> 
> ...





elder999 said:


> Yeah-once the knife is out, shoot them.....or hit 'em with the cane-most of these days, I've got the cane-it'll be in my hand....I'm  practicing  "hit 'em with the cane and *then* shoot 'em,"but really hoping that I never get to try it out......



Elder and I disagree on philosophical/religious matters sometimes.  However I believe him to be a very skilled martial arts practitioner.  More importantly, I believe, as shown by his posts above, that his belief about martial arts used in self defense, is that the primary rule is to survive.  I also believe that.  I think that is the disconnect that many martial artists suffer under.  Use of martial arts with survival in mind requires a different set of rules than the rules that might be used in a dojo for sparring.

If you are going to ensure survival, what may happen to an opponent is only a consideration as it pertains to the opponent losing the ability to continue a fight intended to hurt or kill you.  The only care one should have is will a particular technique achieve that goal and allow survival (and hopefully not land you in court).

In the dojo, one should not wish to injure or maim a practice opponent.  So the rules are different.  This creates a possible problem when using one's martial art in the wild.  Can one easily slip from the rules of practice in the dojo, and rules of body or life survival, when an opponent has a real desire to cause injury or death to you?

Elder, if I am too presumptuous and have not stated correctly what you believe, please correct me quickly.



Hanzou said:


> I disagree. In general people are more likely to comply to a law enforcement officer than some random joe on the street. That translates into people respecting the badge. Is that always the case? No. However, as Dropbear stated, most people simply don't want to deal with the repercussions of messing around with a cop, and will typically listen to what they tell them to do.
> 
> *Perhaps I stated my case too strongly.  But in the context of using wrist locks, I thought we were talking about people who do not want to deal calmly or comply with police actions.*
> 
> ...



*Your last paragraph, after expanding your quoted post:*  I think the lack of ability of the "skilled practitioners" you mention in fact, denies they are skilled practitioners.  I don't know what techniques they were teaching, nor if they knew whan those techniques might not be appropriate, nor their actual skill, so I can't comment further.  I would say that much as I believe in the Hapkido I was taught, I think some things might have more effectiveness in some situations than in others.  I also think that one should not disregard any technique until one has thoroughly thought it out.

I also believe that size matters (not so much), but will be trumped by skill and rule-mindset.  For you to say any particular wrist lock may not work against a big strong person may have merit.  Especially in the dojo (but possibly even outside the dojo) when the opponent expects it.  But I think this goes back to rules and your art's mind set that only your martial art has any validity.

There are so many shared techniques between all present day martial arts that it surprises me people can think that way.  But you are apparently operating from the mind set that a grappling art only has some set of wrist locks.  I can't speak for other grappling arts, but the Hapkido I studied has joint locks of all body appendages as well as the back and neck.

We were also taught many ways to apply techniques besides grabbing a wrist and twisting it.  We also learned pressure points to aid in applying joint locks, causing pain, or even killing.  We learned kicks and punches as well as blocks against kicks and punches.  We learned many ways to set up a throw or defend against one.  If I don't think a joint lock will be the most effective defense, I will do something else, but frankly, at the speed of combat, most will work.  At that speed, an opponent really doesn't have much time to apply strength as a counter.  At a certain point, strength will not be useful as a counter.

All that said, I have also stated on many occasions, that on any given day, any martial artist may have a bad day, and an opponent may have a very good day.  When that happens, the outcome may not go the way either the "attackee" or the "attacker" wishes.  That is why martial artists must always practice both their art and their mindset.

I think silliness is on your side of the discussion.  If you are so convinced you are right, good for you; be at peace with yourself, as I will be with myself.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 23, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> As was mentioned earlier, there's a difference between someone pointing a gun at you, and someone throwing multiple punches at you. I have yet to see anyone *consistently *snatch a punch out of the air and apply a wrist lock.



Interesting.  Another interesting demonstration of mindset.  There is indeed a difference between an opponent who has a weapon and one who does not.  But either way, your body and/or life are at stake.  Someone who is "throwing multiple punches" will still be vulnerable to grappling done in a way such as to prevent his modifying his attack before you gain control with your grapple.  But more importantly, why would I confine myself to trying to apply a wrist lock when I might take out his knee or his eyes, or some other attack on his body?

Apparently you have seen people defend a strike by snatching a punch out of the air, just not consistently.  Maybe just more practice required to improve the speed and skill?  What did they do after they had completed the snatch?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 23, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Well,I was suggesting that using standing wristlocks as a sort of "grappling sucker punch" _is_ an appropriate context for that tool - one in which they have been demonstrated to work.
> 
> What other context(s) would you suggest are appropriate for using standing wristlocks?



As I understand what you mean, and from my own learning, I cannot argue with what you say.  Most people aren't taught to defend against grappling, unless they are in an art that teaches grappling.  And certainly one  would not wish to slow down to the point the person being grappled can see it coming and defend against it.  That isn't done with a sucker punch, it wouldn't be done with a grapple either.

I think you are correct.  I can't think of another context.

I have found this thread interesting.  People who aren't taught grappling don't spend enough time at it, if any time at all, so unfortunately don't really understand the effectiveness of grappling.  Nor should they presume that grappling arts only teach grappling.  At least the Hapkido I studied didn't.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 23, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> Elder and I disagree on philosophical/religious matters sometimes.  However I believe him to be a very skilled martial arts practitioner.  More importantly, I believe, as shown by his posts above, that his belief about martial arts used in self defense, is that the primary rule is to survive.  I also believe that.  I think that is the disconnect that many martial artists suffer under.  Use of martial arts with survival in mind requires a different set of rules than the rules that might be used in a dojo for sparring.
> 
> If you are going to ensure survival, what may happen to an opponent is only a consideration as it pertains to the opponent losing the ability to continue a fight intended to hurt or kill you.  The only care one should have is will a particular technique achieve that goal and allow survival (and hopefully not land you in court).
> 
> ...



I consider them "skilled" because they were of senior rank and in some cases running their own schools. Honestly they had fairly good theory, it was the application that was lacking, and that lack came from a clear history of little to no live sparring practice.



> I also believe that size matters (not so much), but will be trumped by skill and rule-mindset.  For you to say any particular wrist lock may not work against a big strong person may have merit.  Especially in the dojo (but possibly even outside the dojo) when the opponent expects it.  But I think this goes back to rules and your art's mind set that only your martial art has any validity.
> 
> There are so many shared techniques between all present day martial arts that it surprises me people can think that way.  But you are apparently operating from the mind set that a grappling art only has some set of wrist locks.  I can't speak for other grappling arts, but the Hapkido I studied has joint locks of all body appendages as well as the back and neck.
> 
> We were also taught many ways to apply techniques besides grabbing a wrist and twisting it.  We also learned pressure points to aid in applying joint locks, causing pain, or even killing.  We learned kicks and punches as well as blocks against kicks and punches.  We learned many ways to set up a throw or defend against one.  If I don't think a joint lock will be the most effective defense, I will do something else, but frankly, at the speed of combat, most will work.  At that speed, an opponent really doesn't have much time to apply strength as a counter.  At a certain point, strength will not be useful as a counter.



So which is it? You said earlier that in Hapkido you learned that size "meant nothing when applying or resisting a properly applied technique". Now you're saying that some things may not work on a bigger stronger person?

Let me just state that your latter statement is far more sensible, and your earlier comment is pure MA fantasy. Thus I'm curious on which side of the fence your viewpoint truly lies.

I would also like to state that I hardly believe that my preferred MA is  the only style that is valid. The simply truth is that after you've practiced styles that ground themselves in pure practicality instead of tradition and/or mystical mumbo-jumbo, you tend to have a more skeptical (if not more cynical) mindset.



> All that said, I have also stated on many occasions, that on any given day, any martial artist may have a bad day, and an opponent may have a very good day.  When that happens, the outcome may not go the way either the "attackee" or the "attacker" wishes.  That is why martial artists must always practice both their art and their mindset.
> 
> I think silliness is on your side of the discussion.  If you are so convinced you are right, good for you; be at peace with yourself, as I will be with myself.



Not so much as one person is right and someone else is wrong, but more along the lines of fantasy versus reality, which is why I brought up certain MAs that tend to do pretty demos, but when performed in a practical manner, looks far less pretty and esoteric.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Mar 23, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I consider them "skilled" because they were of senior rank and in some cases running their own schools. Honestly they had fairly good theory, it was the application that was lacking, and that lack came from a clear history of little to no live sparring practice.





Hanzou said:


> The simply truth is that after you've practiced styles that ground themselves in pure practicality instead of tradition and/or mystical mumbo-jumbo, you tend to have a more skeptical (if not more cynical) mindset.





Hanzou said:


> Not so much as one person is right and someone else is wrong, but more along the lines of fantasy versus reality, which is why I brought up certain MAs that tend to do pretty demos, but when performed in a practical manner, looks far less pretty and esoteric.



As usual you are using your limited experience and personal bias and attempting to apply it to other martial arts in general.


----------



## Tgace (Mar 23, 2016)

I have put people into wrist locks at work, but all of them have been what I term "maybe" people. Not fully resisting, but not following commands either. The trick is to not be so "committed" to making the lock work that you just hang on and start wrestling over it when you should go to plan B.


----------



## Tgace (Mar 23, 2016)

I wrote this on an Aikido thread:

Aikido and Law Enforcement

IMO the same applies here....


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 23, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> As usual you are using your limited experience and personal bias and attempting to apply it to other martial arts in general.



So do you believe that size means nothing when it comes to wrist locks? Do you also believe that people treat law enforcement like everyone else? Finally, do you believe that people performing demos or kata end up looking completely different in live fighting situations?

That's all I was saying.....


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 23, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I consider them "skilled" because they were of senior rank and in some cases running their own schools. Honestly they had fairly good theory, it was the application that was lacking, and that lack came from a clear history of little to no live sparring practice.
> 
> *Well, sparring in Hapkido has to be different than for some other arts, especially striking arts.  It is not good to fully apply a damaging (wrist) lock at speed without allowing your opponent to flow into the move.  If those you saw haven't been practicing moves at speed but stopping before something gets broken, it may happen that they won't be able to apply the technique properly at speed.  Than also has to be a learned skill.  Perhaps that was the disconnect for those you mention.  I don't know.  But normally, senior rank, which I would interpret to be at least 4th dan, more likely 5th dan or above.  By that time, there should be no difficulty in properly applying techniques, nor in determining what technique is proper.*
> 
> ...



Well, the problem is that you brought my art into your discussion, and I felt I wanted to clear up your misunderstanding.  BTW, I met some people from a special military unit the last time I was in Korea.  You could not get into that unit unless you had a 3rd dan in a martial art.  All else being equal, a 3rd dan in Hapkido would be probably be selected over an equal applicant who was 3rd dan in another MA.  Ummm, maybe that unit was a fantasy of my mind?  The members of the Korean Police training for hostage/terrorist mitigation before the Olympics in Seoul, were trained in Hapkido.  More fantasy I guess?


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 23, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> Well, the problem is that you brought my art into your discussion, and I felt I wanted to clear up your misunderstanding.  BTW, I met some people from a special military unit the last time I was in Korea.  You could not get into that unit unless you had a 3rd dan in a martial art.  All else being equal, a 3rd dan in Hapkido would be probably be selected over an equal applicant who was 3rd dan in another MA.  Ummm, maybe that unit was a fantasy of my mind?  The members of the Korean Police training for hostage/terrorist mitigation before the Olympics in Seoul, were trained in Hapkido.  More fantasy I guess?



Your average run-of-the-mill martial art hobbyist isn't training at anywhere near the level of a soldier in any armed forces.

Are those the guys who told you that size didn't matter?


----------



## WaterGal (Mar 23, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> So which is it? You said earlier that in Hapkido you learned that size "meant nothing when applying or resisting a properly applied technique". Now you're saying that some things may not work on a bigger stronger person?



Not the person you were responding to, but.... a skillful joint lock can work regardless of the strength/size of the opponent.  However, the stronger the opponent is, the more resistance they'll be able to provide, and the more difficult it will be to successfully get the opponent into position and execute the technique.


----------



## Tgace (Mar 23, 2016)

WaterGal said:


> Not the person you were responding to, but.... a skillful joint lock can work regardless of the strength/size of the opponent.  However, the stronger the opponent is, the more resistance they'll be able to provide, and the more difficult it will be to successfully get the opponent into position and execute the technique.


"Can" and "likely to" are two different things.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 23, 2016)

WaterGal said:


> Not the person you were responding to, but.... a skillful joint lock can work regardless of the strength/size of the opponent.  However, the stronger the opponent is, the more resistance they'll be able to provide, and the more difficult it will be to successfully get the opponent into position and execute the technique.



Nowhere in that quote did I say a joint lock couldn't work. My issue is with the notion that application and resistance mean nothing when it comes to factors like size, body type, age, etc. In other words you applying a wrist lock on an 81 year old with arthritis is the same as applying a wrist lock on a roided up 25 year old.

Nonsense.

Even a cursory level of free sparring in the dojang would expose how absolutely nonsensical that belief is.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 23, 2016)

WaterGal said:


> Not the person you were responding to, but.... a skillful joint lock can work regardless of the strength/size of the opponent.  However, the stronger the opponent is, the more resistance they'll be able to provide, and the more difficult it will be to successfully get the opponent into position and execute the technique.



If the strength is too different a joint lock won't work.

The tend to work on the ground because you are doing joint locks that use the weight of the whole body.

For a standing joint lock you have two hands on one.

But this does not give you more strength than everybody.


----------



## Gnarlie (Mar 23, 2016)

All posts so far assume a particular defined end technique as the goal. If a strong person resists, a skilled jointlocker changes the technique. Resist one thing, you inadvertently help with another thing. In this aspect, size is irrelevant. 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 23, 2016)

Gnarlie said:


> All posts so far assume a particular defined end technique as the goal. If a strong person resists, a skilled jointlocker changes the technique. Resist one thing, you inadvertently help with another thing. In this aspect, size is irrelevant.


Agree! This is why all locks (or throws) should be "trained in pairs" and both should be applied in reverse directions. The stronger that your opponent is, the more force that you can borrow from him when you have switched into the reverse direction.

For example, when you try to straight your opponent's arm and apply a shoulder lock on him, when he resists, his resistance force can help you to bend his arm and change your shoulder lock into an elbow lock with very little effort.


----------



## Gnarlie (Mar 23, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! This is why all locks (or throws) should be "trained in pairs" and both should be applied in reverse directions. The stronger that your opponent is, the more force that you can borrow from him when you have switched into the reverse direction.
> 
> For example, when you try to straight your opponent's arm and apply a shoulder lock on him, when he resists, his resistance force can help you to bend his arm and change your shoulder lock into an elbow lock with very little effort.


Yep. And if the 180 degree paired technique doesn't work, the perpendicular one might. And so on... it might be possible to brute force resist a specific technique, but it is VERY difficult to do so without falling into another one.

This is evident even when people resist during demonstrated techniques. The person demonstrating has 3 choices: give up, muscle through and risk failure or hurting their partner, or change the technique and take advantage of the surprise and direction change.


----------



## WaterGal (Mar 23, 2016)

drop bear said:


> If the strength is too different a joint lock won't work.
> 
> The tend to work on the ground because you are doing joint locks that use the weight of the whole body.
> 
> ...



If you're relying on your hand/wrist strength to do a standing wrist lock, yeah, you're going to have a really hard time. If you use your body weight and core strength to apply the standing technique, it'll be easier.  Still difficult on a strong opponent, but more feasible.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 23, 2016)

Gnarlie said:


> direction change.


Agree! The direction change is very important.

1. You apply downward pressure wrist lock on your opponent as shown in the following clip, your opponent can raise his elbow to release that pressure.
2. You change your downward pressure into horizontal pressure, your opponent can turn his body to release that pressure.
3. You then change your horizontal pressure into a pulling pressure and pull your opponent's arm straight.

This is why the wrist lock will require to train in all 3 different directions (not shown in this clip).


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 23, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Your average run-of-the-mill martial art hobbyist isn't training at anywhere near the level of a soldier in any armed forces.
> 
> Are those the guys who told you that size didn't matter?



I was in the US military and I have studied martial arts.  Your remark doesn't match what I have observed.

Your second question doesn't merit an answer.

Let's just leave it that we disagree.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Your average run-of-the-mill martial art hobbyist isn't training at anywhere near the level of a soldier in any armed forces.


Your average run of the mill martial art hobbyist is going to spend a lot more time on unarmed fighting/sparring than most soldiers in any armed forces because the soldiers would spend most of their time on weapons training.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

RTKDCMB said:


> Your average run of the mill martial art hobbyist is going to spend a lot more time on unarmed fighting/sparring than most soldiers in any armed forces because the soldiers would spend most of their time on weapons training.





oftheherd1 said:


> I was in the US military and I have studied martial arts.  Your remark doesn't match what I have observed.



Korean soldiers:







Run of the mill MA instructors:


----------



## Gnarlie (Mar 24, 2016)

Ironic that you would choose Dojunim Ji Han Jae to represent a run of the mill MA instructor. Just saying.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 24, 2016)

*I train military people regularly.*  They are wonderfully fit, mentally strong people and adapt quickly in general.  The basic hand to hand skill sets they receive are functional depending on their branch.  However, in general, they do not spend a lot of time on them instead focusing on other training.  Hence why those who want to be better prepared seek outside instruction.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

Gnarlie said:


> Ironic that you would choose Dojunim Ji Han Jae to represent a run of the mill MA instructor. Just saying.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk



Mr. Han Jae looks to be well taken care of.


----------



## Gnarlie (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Mr. Han Jae looks to be well taken care of.


That happens when your career has been a defining factor in Korean Military and Security Services martial arts.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

hoshin1600 said:


> Joint locks work just fine. The problem is that many people keep trying to use a screwdriver as a hammer.
> Joint minipulation work well when used as they were intended within the context they were intended.
> It's less about a "sucker punch" and more about appropriate context.


This. 

This is something I review constantly with my students. I get questions like, "how do you make this work if the arm pulls back?" My answer: "You don't - that's the wrong situation for this technique, so it's the wrong technique for that situation. That's why we have others."

When you develop the pattern-matching (how our minds work with most information) skill from lots of successful repetitions, you can "spot" an opportunity to use a wrist lock. This is why some folks criticize aiki arts - we have to set up a situation to practice the technique, so we can learn to recognize the right kind of situation when it appears later (in randori, or in self-defense). This is also why when I'm demonstrating defenses for students, I often show techniques that weren't on my plan. I respond to the situation created by the "attacker". 

And, yes, sometimes that even means I end up "catching" a punching hand and putting on a lock - or so it seems to the observers. In fact, I don't catch it - I happen to move into a space that forces him to shorten his arm (he bends it because he's trying to re-target and I'm too close, perhaps) and my hand happens to intercept the right part of the arm at that moment. I recognize the opportunity and pivot him into a lock or a throw. It's not the most common of situations, but if someone really commits attacks, it sometimes occurs. If I'm not there, or my hand doesn't happen to hit that timing, I'd be doing another technique.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

Langenschwert said:


> Well, the problem with wrist locks is that the point of breaking the wrist is past the point of some folks' pain compliance threshold. If you have to use one "for real", then you might break the wrist before the bad guy thinks about saying uncle. But I suppose, that's a "him" problem and not a "you" problem.
> 
> However, they certainly work in context. In my albeit limited experience, there are some people who are just plain good at wrist locks, just like some people have a wickedly fast jab, and some people have a really good power double. If you're good at wrist locks, awesome. One of the guys in my club is just fantastic at them. I'm not that guy.


This can happen with larger joints, as well. A student I trained alongside (who was a bouncer) had this happen on a shoulder lock. The guy just stood up through it, tearing his own shoulder joint up on the way.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Mar 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> This can happen with larger joints, as well. A student I trained alongside (who was a bouncer) had this happen on a shoulder lock. The guy just stood up through it, tearing his own shoulder joint up on the way.



Happens often enough... especially with drugs being involved. One of the problems I've encountered with out of control patients is that certain drugs (with PCP being the best known example) make pressure points, joint locks, basically any sort of pain compliance technique, absolutely useless. The only non-lethal solution in that situation is unconsciousness. I've choked out a few, but mostly we dog pile them. A dose of vecuronium given IM will still paralyze them. It just doesn't work as fast as IV. Sure, we have to intubate them after, but it works.
Not really an option in most situations, however.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

drop bear said:


> My experience has been that people don't really want to fight the cops even if they are resisting them. Too many consequences.
> 
> I have fought cuffs on to people. And I have seen people just allow themselves to be cuffed. So there is a spectrum there.
> 
> Good hammerlocks work well if you don't break the arm.


In most cases, when someone is fighting against a cop, they aren't thinking of consequences, at all. Consequences are only dealt with in the prefrontal cortex. Under extreme emotions, the limbic system does a dumb of neurotransmitters that shut down the communication from the PFC and the emotions take over (emotional hijacking is a common term for this). This is the same state someone is in who loses their mind when you say, "calm down." (Because calming down is an executive function, coming from the PFC.)

To put it in perspective, the PFC (and the corresponding executive functions) are the last part of the brain to develop (mid-20's, usually), and are not strong in most teens. That's why so many teens do things that make no sense, given the consequences.

I think in your original comment, you're talking about folks who are being belligerent, but not really fighting back. They make a show of resisting, but it's mostly just a show. The cops I know seem to meet fewer of those than the emotionally hijacked.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> In most cases, when someone is fighting against a cop, they aren't thinking of consequences, at all. Consequences are only dealt with in the prefrontal cortex. Under extreme emotions, the limbic system does a dumb of neurotransmitters that shut down the communication from the PFC and the emotions take over (emotional hijacking is a common term for this). This is the same state someone is in who loses their mind when you say, "calm down." (Because calming down is an executive function, coming from the PFC.)
> 
> To put it in perspective, the PFC (and the corresponding executive functions) are the last part of the brain to develop (mid-20's, usually), and are not strong in most teens. That's why so many teens do things that make no sense, given the consequences.
> 
> I think in your original comment, you're talking about folks who are being belligerent, but not really fighting back. They make a show of resisting, but it's mostly just a show. The cops I know seem to meet fewer of those than the emotionally hijacked.



No. That just dosent seem the case.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> I consider them "skilled" because they were of senior rank and in some cases running their own schools. Honestly they had fairly good theory, it was the application that was lacking, and that lack came from a clear history of little to no live sparring practice.


Perhaps here we are again dealing with skill v. rank. Or skill at form v. skill at application. There's another possibility. I've had people ask me how I'd do some a particular technique if they pull the punch back. I always decline to attempt that demonstration, which is doomed to fail, for two reasons: 

First, they're asking me to do a specific technique, so they'll know what's coming and are likely to counter or resist (even if only unconsciously).

Second, they're asking me to do the technique in a situation that the technique isn't meant for. If they gave me that attack, I'd do a different response.

Oh, and a third one (I've often seen this one on YoutTube videos): They might "snatch" the punch back. This is usually what is shown when someone demonstrates the difficulty in "catching" a punch (again, not really what happens) - they throw the punch out, but with no striking force, then they pull it back as fast as they can. I call this "stealing a punch".



> So which is it? You said earlier that in Hapkido you learned that size "meant nothing when applying or resisting a properly applied technique". Now you're saying that some things may not work on a bigger stronger person?



Not really that different, actually, if you define "properly applied" as including the situation and the attacker's unbalance. Once they are unbalanced and not expecting it, size and strength don't matter much, because they won't be using them in any active fashion. One exception: body builders and the like. I hate trying to lock up their wrists, because the ligaments can be so short, you can't get the joints bound against themselves in any useful manner. Of course, once we get past that "right fit" situation, size matters all over the place, because I can force a lock against a weak arm, but probably not against a stronger one.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

drop bear said:


> No. That just dosent seem the case.


What doesn't seem the case? Are you saying people fighting against cops are not ignoring the consequences?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

Gnarlie said:


> Yep. And if the 180 degree paired technique doesn't work, the perpendicular one might. And so on... it might be possible to brute force resist a specific technique, but it is VERY difficult to do so without falling into another one.
> 
> This is evident even when people resist during demonstrated techniques. The person demonstrating has 3 choices: give up, muscle through and risk failure or hurting their partner, or change the technique and take advantage of the surprise and direction change.


Yes. I start this training early with my students. It's the foundation of using the principle of "aiki" properly for self-defense. You have to go where the technique is easiest. Often, that means letting them go where they are heading when they resist.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> What doesn't seem the case? Are you saying people fighting against cops are not ignoring the consequences?



People don't really fight the cops because they are aware of the consequences. 

I don't think your emotional hijacking is as much of a thing as you make it out to be.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> People don't really fight the cops because they are aware of the consequences.
> 
> I don't think your emotional hijacking is as much of a thing as you make it out to be.


It's a real, physical process. It happens in most fights (actually, is the cause of most fights). It happens in arguments (that sometimes turn into fights). And it happens frequently when someone reacts poorly to a stressful situation, like when being stopped by the cops. Remember that cops often show up AFTER the trouble started, so they walk in on that person after the PFC is already out of the picture.

Understanding this process should be central to anyone's self-defense training - it's one of the things that makes a pissed-off bar attacker different from a fighter in a bout.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 25, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> It's a real, physical process. It happens in most fights (actually, is the cause of most fights). It happens in arguments (that sometimes turn into fights). And it happens frequently when someone reacts poorly to a stressful situation, like when being stopped by the cops. Remember that cops often show up AFTER the trouble started, so they walk in on that person after the PFC is already out of the picture.
> 
> Understanding this process should be central to anyone's self-defense training - it's one of the things that makes a pissed-off bar attacker different from a fighter in a bout.



Sounds a bit made up. It certainly does not happen in most fights.

Someone brain farts. And I slap them. Suddenly they are aware of the consequences. Amazingly their uncontrollable action becomes a controlled one.

Someone wants to kick my head in Because that is acceptable behaviour. Cops turn up. Guy stops because there is greater consequences for kicking a cops head in than a bouncers.

Mabye you have a source for this where it is an actual effect. But the way you state it so far does not sound real.

Right here guy slaps a publican and gets smashed for it. Look at how amazingly controlled he suddenly becomes when he realises he is in a serious situation.

Like magic.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Sounds a bit made up. It certainly does not happen in most fights.
> 
> Someone brain farts. And I slap them. Suddenly they are aware of the consequences. Amazingly their uncontrollable action becomes a controlled one.
> 
> ...


Just because you're unaware of the science of neurotransmitters, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 25, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Just because you're unaware of the science of neurotransmitters, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



Correct.

But also just because you say things like neurotransmitters does not mean you understand the concept.

So who taught you this?

What level of understanding do they have?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Correct.
> 
> But also just because you say things like neurotransmitters does not mean you understand the concept.
> 
> ...


I did my undergrad work in Psychology. I read actual textbooks and listen to lectures by folks with PhD and PsyD after their names - the people who actually do the research in this stuff. As I said, there's science in this, not conjecture. That evidence-based training you always want - this is part of it.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 25, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I did my undergrad work in Psychology. I read actual textbooks and listen to lectures by folks with PhD and PsyD after their names - the people who actually do the research in this stuff. As I said, there's science in this, not conjecture. That evidence-based training you always want - this is part of it.



Fair enough. Most people who honk on about self defence psychology are full of crap. 

Do you have the articles on this.  It would be interesting to read?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Mar 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> People don't really fight the cops because they are aware of the consequences.
> 
> I don't think your emotional hijacking is as much of a thing as you make it out to be.



Actually, there's little doubt that emotional hijacking is a real phenomenon. How much of a role it plays in bar fights, of course, is quite debatable.
Personally, I'd hesitate to use terms like "most" or "few" simply because actual data on this very specific situation is not available. I'd settle for "it's one possible factor."

It's difficult to extrapolate from the general to the specific, especially given the enormous number of variable at play.


----------



## Steve (Mar 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> People don't really fight the cops because they are aware of the consequences.
> 
> I don't think your emotional hijacking is as much of a thing as you make it out to be.


There was a time in college I came face to face with a bear.   I knew academically what to do.   But I screamed like a 7 year old girl stumbled to the ground and ended up running away.  In our words, in spite of knowing what I should do, I was completely out of my mind.   I was on full auto pilot.  I completely understand what it means to be e optionally hijacked.  I don't remember anything of what happened between the screaming and the running, and being in my car, seriously... Listening to a cassette tape of Disney songs my wife had from her work at the Disney stores.  

What's interesting to me is that I've been in fights, threatened with a knife, was in some hairy situations in Saudi Arabia, and other situations that were very stressful and didn't have that feeling.   So, I don't think it's a given that it will happen under extreme stress.  But I will say that it happens, and when it happens to you, you will know it. 

I've seen it happen to others, too.  Road rage is a fairly common one.


----------



## Steve (Mar 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> There was a time in college I came face to face with a bear.   I knew academically what to do.   But I screamed like a 7 year old girl stumbled to the ground and ended up running away.  In our words, in spite of knowing what I should do, I was completely out of my mind.   I was on full auto pilot.  I completely understand what it means to be e optionally hijacked.  I don't remember anything of what happened between the screaming and the running, and being in my car, seriously... Listening to a cassette tape of Disney songs my wife had from her work at the Disney stores.
> 
> What's interesting to me is that I've been in fights, threatened with a knife, was in some hairy situations in Saudi Arabia, and other situations that were very stressful and didn't have that feeling.   So, I don't think it's a given that it will happen under extreme stress.  But I will say that it happens, and when it happens to you, you will know it.
> 
> I've seen it happen to others, too.  Road rage is a fairly common one.


The morning after, I hope that makes sense.  Typing on an iPad stinks. I apologize for the typos.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 26, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Fair enough. Most people who honk on about self defence psychology are full of crap.
> 
> Do you have the articles on this.  It would be interesting to read?


I'll see what I can dig up. I may have some notes on some of the sources I've run into. Mind you, my notes are usually a complete mess, so...


----------



## drop bear (Mar 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> There was a time in college I came face to face with a bear.   I knew academically what to do.   But I screamed like a 7 year old girl stumbled to the ground and ended up running away.  In our words, in spite of knowing what I should do, I was completely out of my mind.   I was on full auto pilot.  I completely understand what it means to be e optionally hijacked.  I don't remember anything of what happened between the screaming and the running, and being in my car, seriously... Listening to a cassette tape of Disney songs my wife had from her work at the Disney stores.
> 
> What's interesting to me is that I've been in fights, threatened with a knife, was in some hairy situations in Saudi Arabia, and other situations that were very stressful and didn't have that feeling.   So, I don't think it's a given that it will happen under extreme stress.  But I will say that it happens, and when it happens to you, you will know it.
> 
> I've seen it happen to others, too.  Road rage is a fairly common one.



You dont choose to road rage?


----------



## Steve (Mar 26, 2016)

drop bear said:


> You dont choose to road rage?


I don't think so.  I think the technical term is that a person "loses their ****."


----------



## Dirty Dog (Mar 26, 2016)

drop bear said:


> You dont choose to road rage?



Sometimes. Sometimes not. That's how people are. Even the calmest, most even tempered person can just have "one of those days" and lose it, while other people seem to be like that pretty much all the time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 27, 2016)

drop bear said:


> You dont choose to road rage?


There's a "yes" and a "no" to this. The road rage reaction, itself, isn't chosen. However, we can make behavioral and attitudinal choices that make it highly unlikely. There's also a period of time (a few seconds, except in extreme situations) where we can actually recognize the precursors to the neurotransmitter dump (this is part of the "self-awareness" that's one quadrant of what's taught as "emotional intelligence"), and we can cut off the sequence by some fairly simple methods (deep breathing, thinking of something entirely different, going for a walk, doing push-ups). So, no, we don't actually choose to road rage, but we oddly can choose NOT to road rage.


----------

