# That's just not how it works in real life.



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

I was first going to place this in the WC forum, but it isn't a problem specific to that. Then, I was going to place it in CMM, but it isn't really specific to any one style..

This is something I see a lot in discussions around here, but not just here, pretty much whenever the subject is broached. It generally reads something like..

If my opponent does X I would just do Y, Z, a spinning G, two Fs and a C..fight over. It's like an imaginary Van Damm movie is playing out in their head and spilling into a post.

It's BS. That's just not how it works in real life. You can prepare yourself to the best of you ability, but you'll never know how you will react to a given situation until you experience said situation. It will rarely, if ever, happen according to any script, and this is especially true in a heated situation on the cusp of, or in the midst of, real combat. At that point the choreographer will be notably absent.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jun 1, 2017)

I suspect the problem is that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of your training.
You're not being taught techniques. It just looks like you are. What you're really being taught is movement, balance, timing, positioning, etc. When you understand the principles behind the "techniques" used as teaching tools, you'll move in the correct and appropriate way in pretty much any circumstance.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> I suspect the problem is that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of your training.
> You're not being taught techniques. It just looks like you are. What you're really being taught is movement, balance, timing, positioning, etc. When you understand the principles behind the "techniques" used as teaching tools, you'll move in the correct and appropriate way in pretty much any circumstance.


 It isn't me that has misunderstood anything, but many many people seem to misunderstand the nature of actual combat.

You, in a way, just did the very thing I was referring to. You just assume your body will respond in the 'right way'. Have you tested that?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> It isn't me that has misunderstood anything, but many many people seem to misunderstand the nature of actual combat.
> 
> You, in a way, just did the very thing I was referring to. You just assume your body will respond in the 'right way'. Have you tested that?



Of course. I've been assaulted countless times in the ER. I've had knives pulled on me 3 times (plus once in the street), a gun once. I've taken who knows how many knives and guns off patients before they were drawn. 
If your body isn't moving properly, you haven't understood the principles.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

I used to think along these same lines once. I believed in my training, my system. I remember walking into my first Mui Thai class armed only with a bunch of theory and technique I had drilled over some years. I was so sure I could beat anyone.

That was the day I completely rewrote my approach, and began to diversify.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> Of course. I've been assaulted countless times in the ER. I've had knives pulled on me 3 times (plus once in the street), a gun once. I've taken who knows how many knives and guns off patients before they were drawn.
> If your body isn't moving properly, you haven't understood the principles.


And of those situations, how many were something you could have predicted, resulting in a prescripted set of moves that actually happened as you expected?


----------



## jobo (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> It isn't me that has misunderstood anything, but many many people seem to misunderstand the nature of actual combat.
> 
> You, in a way, just did the very thing I was referring to. You just assume your body will respond in the 'right way'. Have you tested that?


there is always a chance someone will freeze under pressure, you see it in all sports like when a player misses an open goal. Tapping in at a practise match is very different to a cup final with 100, 000 fans watching.

but you really can't recreate the pressure of a cup final or your your example the pressure of some one trying to kill you to  a ring. Your mma dude is just as likely to freeze as any other fighter when faced with real life and high stakes

if you freeze or not is down to particular personality types and how much control they have over their nervous system. The more your have practised a move the more it is programmed in, the higher the chance of it working when you need it. There are however no guarantees


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> And of those situations, how many were something you could have predicted, resulting in a prescripted set of moves that actually happened as you expected?


If you go back and reread DD's original comment, he specifically says it's not about specific techniques. It's about developing attributes which will result in moving appropriately under pressure.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

Tony Dismukes said:


> If you go back and reread DD's original comment, he specifically says it's not about specific techniques. It's about developing attributes which will result in moving appropriately under pressure.


Yes, I know that. Yet, developing correct form and technique isn't enough.

Besides, that is beside the point. Saying 'my' body will respond appropriately' is all well and good until things start happening radically different than they did in the dojo, which itself is a few steps from thinking you can predict any fight, move by move. THAT just never happens, not in my rather extensive experience.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> You just assume your body will respond in the 'right way'.



I find the idea of DD 'assuming' anything like that quite strange. I think you are assuming most people on here are young film fans with little experience in the 'real' world.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> not in my rather extensive experience



Which is what?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Yes, I know that. Yet, developing correct form and technique isn't enough.
> 
> Besides, that is beside the point. Saying 'my' body will respond appropriately' is all well and good until things start happening radically different than they did in the dojo, which itself is a few steps from thinking you can predict any fight, move by move. THAT just never happens, not in my rather extensive experience.


He isn't saying my body _will_ respond appropriately, he's saying my body _has_ responded appropriately. Basically negating the points your trying to make by saying hat his body won't. And as was stated, he's not saying developing form and technique is enough, but understanding the principles is what is needed.


----------



## Steve (Jun 1, 2017)

People believe different things.  The good news is that most people will never need to find out for sure who is right and who isn't.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I find the idea of DD 'assuming' anything like that quite strange. I think you are assuming most people on here are young film fans with little experience in the 'real' world.


I'm not assuming anything. I see "if opponent does X I will do Y then Z"  posts here(and everywhere this topic is broached) all the time. It just isn't realistic.


----------



## jobo (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> And of those situations, how many were something you could have predicted, resulting in a prescripted set of moves that actually happened as you expected?


human beings are actually very predictable in their movement patteer


Martial D said:


> Yes, I know that. Yet, developing correct form and technique isn't enough.
> 
> Besides, that is beside the point. Saying 'my' body will respond appropriately' is all well and good until things start happening radically different than they did in the dojo, which itself is a few steps from thinking you can predict any fight, move by move. THAT just never happens, not in my rather extensive experience.


but they don't happen that differently. There are only a limited number of ways a fellow human can attack you.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 1, 2017)

You train hard so you get instincts so you don't have to think about what you do and if someone doesn't react the way you want then you go into something else. I've never seen anyone here say that something will work 100% of the time. The whole point of techniques are to give you tools and to get them sharp like a builder he may never not need his chisel in 10 different jobs but he may need it once but when he does then that chisel will be sharp and ready for use. Same goes for fighting.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> He isn't saying my body _will_ respond appropriately, he's saying my body _has_ responded appropriately. Basically negating the points your trying to make by saying hat his body won't. And as was stated, he's not saying developing form and technique is enough, but understanding the principles is what is needed.



Yes, that is also what I am saying. But that understanding doesn't come without the knowledge that you can rarely, if ever, predict how any given altercation will happen.

You plan to do Y, Z in response to X but suddenly you are on your back. Ears ringing and vision flashing white because it didn't work. What then?


----------



## wingchun100 (Jun 1, 2017)

Anyone who thinks in terms of how you can always counter attack A with moves B-C-D-E is naturally going to get their butts handed to them. To paraphrase Bruce Lee, we are not machines...we are human beings, fluid and alive. This is why sparring in any class is so important. You can't just train pre-set self-defense applications. That's a given in ANY martial arts school.

Having said, pre-determined drills can be useful if your Sifu (or you, if you are the teacher) is trying to teach the structure of a specific technique.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I'm not assuming anything. I see "if opponent does X I will do Y then Z"  posts here(and everywhere this topic is broached) all the time. It just isn't realistic.



I don't think what you are 'reading' is what you think you are reading. If you see these posts all the time quote some so we can see exactly the point you are making, because I rather think you are mistaking the intent of those posts and they don't mean what they think you mean. At the very least quote them so the posters can explain rather than you having a scattergun rant at us all.


----------



## DanT (Jun 1, 2017)

Once you perfect the technique, the applications are endless. 

Once you perfect the principal, the applications are endless.

I agree, it may not work that way in a fight. But you develop the skills to use each of those now perfect techniques when you want.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I was first going to place this in the WC forum, but it isn't a problem specific to that. Then, I was going to place it in CMM, but it isn't really specific to any one style..
> 
> This is something I see a lot in discussions around here, but not just here, pretty much whenever the subject is broached. It generally reads something like..
> 
> ...



i can agree with you 100%.  however many here are disagreeing with you.  i believe the reason is because of the "frame of reference".  by that i mean your experience and the way you used to train led you to this conclusion. for you its obvious. but for others, they have trained differently and did not experience the same type or style of training as yourself.  for them this conclusion was never reached because it just never manifested itself like it did for you.
so for your training yes, if person A does so and so and you try to respond with such and such,, it never looks like that and doesnt turn out that way.  in your dojo you were handed a picture of what reality was going to look like and how things will work.  but in other styles their reality looks completely different, which again may or may not look anything like reality although they think it will.
Rory Miller said "when ever anyone says to me ...in reality this will happen... i always ask , who's reality?
so in your instance, you found your dojo reality did not match with the street reality but for others maybe it did match due to the type of training they did.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I was first going to place this in the WC forum, but it isn't a problem specific to that. Then, I was going to place it in CMM, but it isn't really specific to any one style..
> 
> This is something I see a lot in discussions around here, but not just here, pretty much whenever the subject is broached. It generally reads something like..
> 
> ...


The idea is the if you don't let people square off with you, you won't be surprised, and you will actually have time to formulate a plan, if you catch somebody trying.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I was first going to place this in the WC forum, but it isn't a problem specific to that. Then, I was going to place it in CMM, but it isn't really specific to any one style..
> 
> This is something I see a lot in discussions around here, but not just here, pretty much whenever the subject is broached. It generally reads something like..
> 
> ...


Actually sports research, combat research (by military and LEO), and related research all indicate that it is honestly closer to how it works than you think.

Well, sort of anyway.

In a lot of ways, it breaks down to Classical Conditioning.  Stimulus, response. Trained over many repetitions.  Ring the bell, get food.  It works with any stimulus and quickest/most effectively with visual stimulus (visual stimuli are identified quicker and responded to quicker in the human brain).  When dealing with kinetic responses such as "block," "parry," or "pull the trigger," it works *EXACTLY* the same way.  See the stimulus, do the action.  Batting coaches do this when training baseball players.  Stimulus, response.  The response because "automatic" comparatively quickly.  A few hundred repetitions is sometimes all that's required.  

And here's a little known fact, "visualization drills" (i.e.: imagination) work nearly as well at invoking the classical conditioning stimulus/response effect as actual live experiences.  The human brain has a hard time telling the difference between a well constructed and detailed imagination session and reality.

So your thesis has a small problem.  It is a classical conditioning fact, taken advantage of by sports trainers, shooters, LEO, and the military, that when presented with a visual stimuli that the person *WILL* respond with a programmed technique or series of techniques.

So if this hypothetical person you're discussing spends lots of time imagining a specific attack with a specific response, then he will quite likely respond that way.

The devil in the details, of course, goes back to the specific response.  Will the given response actually work in the way that the person training it thinks that it will?  Additionally, will he actually have time to see and identify the stimulus in time to respond or is the attacker inside of his OODA loop (most likely, yes)?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## wingchun100 (Jun 1, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> i can agree with you 100%.  however many here are disagreeing with you.  i believe the reason is because of the "frame of reference".  by that i mean your experience and the way you used to train led you to this conclusion. for you its obvious. but for others, they have trained differently and did not experience the same type or style of training as yourself.  for them this conclusion was never reached because it just never manifested itself like it did for you.
> so for your training yes, if person A does so and so and you try to respond with such and such,, it never looks like that and doesnt turn out that way.  in your dojo you were handed a picture of what reality was going to look like and how things will work.  but in other styles their reality looks completely different, which again may or may not look anything like reality although they think it will.
> Rory Miller said "when ever anyone says to me ...in reality this will happen... i always ask , who's reality?
> so in your instance, you found your dojo reality did not match with the street reality but for others maybe it did match due to the type of training they did.



While many say "Chi Sao is not fighting," it does simulate it in one way: nothing is planned (unless of course you are choosing to do a pre-determined drill because you want to work specific techniques). Therefore, you don't think, "If he does A then I will do B." You just react. If you don't react, you get hit. Then you figure out why. Then you don't let it happen again.

If it does, you figure out why...and so on.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 1, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> to paraphrase Bruce Lee, we are not machines...we are human beings, fluid and alive


Psychologists (via Classical Conditioning) and the U.S. Military politely disagree with Mr. Lee.

Turns out you CAN program a person to react in certain ways.

This Is Your Brain On War

One excerpt: 
...at condition black, the midbrain is in charge, and you’ll do what you’ve been trained to do — no more, no less. You will do what you’ve been programmed to do — no more, no less.” 

Thus, if a soldier reaches condition black and lacks adequate training, there’s a good chance he or she will freeze up. A well-trained soldier, on the other hand, will likely take action to neutralize the threat. “Given a clear and present danger, with today’s training almost everyone will shoot,” Grossman says.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> And of those situations, how many were something you could have predicted, resulting in a prescripted set of moves that actually happened as you expected?


That's the part that some folks are mis-understanding. Those longer sequences are not (or should not be) about programming a specific sequence for later use. They are about developing movement patterns, transitions, etc. - as well as building the pattern recognition for what presents as an opportunity for the technique. They are unlikely to be used exactly that way in actual combat (nor even in sparring). What will show up, though, is the transitional movement, weight shifts, unification of body and limbs, etc.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> If my opponent does X I would just do Y, Z, a spinning G, two Fs and a C..fight over. It's like an imaginary Van Damm movie is playing out in their head and spilling into a post.
> 
> It's BS. That's just not how it works in real life.


1. Kick low, punch high - if you kick your opponent's groin, 90% chance that his face will be open for your punch.
2. Attack right then attack left - if you punch at your opponent's right shoulder, most of the time he will expose his left shoulder to you.
3. If you want push, you pull first - if you pull, 40% of chance that your opponent will resist. also 40% chance that he will yield.
4. Let your opponent to decide whether he want to escape, or resist - if you sweep your opponent's leg, 50% chance that he will lift up his leg. 50% chance that he will turn his shin bone to against you.
- ...

IMO, the more knowledge that you can "predict" your opponent's respond, the better chance that you can win that fight.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Yes, I know that. Yet, developing correct form and technique isn't enough.
> 
> Besides, that is beside the point. Saying 'my' body will respond appropriately' is all well and good until things start happening radically different than they did in the dojo, which itself is a few steps from thinking you can predict any fight, move by move. THAT just never happens, not in my rather extensive experience.


I don't see anything in any of this that implies that a fight is predictable "move by move". We can predict the likelihood of certain reactions at a given point in time (e.g.: a strike or near strike to the face has a high likelihood of causing someone to flinch backwards, unless they are doing something to avoid it), but not where the fight will flow to. The various movements are about programming the body to transitions that match what happens, rather than sculpting what will happen.


----------



## wingchun100 (Jun 1, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Psychologists (via Classical Conditioning) and the U.S. Military politely disagree with Mr. Lee.
> 
> Turns out you CAN program a person to react in certain ways.
> 
> ...



What he meant is what the OP is referring to: the fact that you will most likely never execute a string of techniques the way you do in class in a predetermined drill, with no resistance.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I'm not assuming anything. I see "if opponent does X I will do Y then Z"  posts here(and everywhere this topic is broached) all the time. It just isn't realistic.


That's odd, because I see not a single post that suggests a sequence flows from a single input.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Yes, that is also what I am saying. But that understanding doesn't come without the knowledge that you can rarely, if ever, predict how any given altercation will happen.
> 
> You plan to do Y, Z in response to X but suddenly you are on your back. Ears ringing and vision flashing white because it didn't work. What then?


You're assuming the "you plan to do Y, Z in response to X" part. That's not how the progression works. You train a range of responses to a given input. When the input comes, you react with whatever your brain matches up to it. That produces an outcome (their punch is blocked, or their punch is slipped and you're on their off-side, or you're on your butt and your head is ringing). You then repeat the process - take that input and react with whatever your brain matches to it. There's no sequence of longer prediction - just pattern matching and reaction. If you have space to plan, you're at most trying to elicit a reaction (pressure them backwards, invite them to enter, etc.), but not predicting an exact sequence of events.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 1, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> What he meant is what the OP is referring to: the fact that you will most likely never execute a string of techniques the way you do in class in a predetermined drill, with no resistance.



That may well be how the OP has trained/been taught but it's doesn't follow that everyone has been taught and trains that way.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 1, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> You're assuming the "you plan to do Y, Z in response to X" part. That's not how the progression works. You train a range of responses to a given input. When the input comes, you react with whatever your brain matches up to it. That produces an outcome (their punch is blocked, or their punch is slipped and you're on their off-side, or you're on your butt and your head is ringing). You then repeat the process - take that input and react with whatever your brain matches to it. There's no sequence of longer prediction - just pattern matching and reaction. If you have space to plan, you're at most trying to elicit a reaction (pressure them backwards, invite them to enter, etc.), but not predicting an exact sequence of events.


The human brain likes it best (reacts most reliably and quickly) when there are fewer possible responses to a given stimuli.  The brain tends to prefer one.  The "Robo Droid" is dumb and lacks effective decision making skills but it can act quite decisively and quickly when programmed.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> If my opponent does X I would just do Y,...


I like to chance that into, "When I attack, if my opponent respond as X, I'll do Y ...".

Let's use "pull" as example. When I pull, if my opponent

- resists, I'll borrow his resistance force, and throw him backward.
- yields, I'll borrow his yielding force, and throw him forward.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

lklawson said:


> The human brain likes it best (reacts most reliably and quickly) when there are fewer possible responses to a given stimuli.  The brain tends to prefer one.  The "Robo Droid" is dumb and lacks effective decision making skills buit it can act quite decisively and quickly when programmed.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Agreed, when dealing with simple stimuli and straight decision-making (choosing between options to click on a specific response, for instance). There are enough variables in physical altercations that we move from straight decision-making to pattern-matching. The brain appears to watch for a pattern, then select the response that matches the pattern. At that point, if we have too many options that match the pattern (and the brain hasn't yet developed a strong preference), it can slow the reaction time. Fortunately, the brain tends to (as you said) find a preference. That preference then becomes the default selection for any pattern it is paired to.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 1, 2017)

jobo said:


> human beings are actually very predictable in their movement patteer.


Agree. If you

- push on your opponent's chest, most of the time he will push back on you.
- punch your opponent, most of the time he will punch you back.
- kick your opponent, even if he doesn't know how to kick, he may still kick back at you just to prove that he can kick too.
- ...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> If my opponent does X I would just do Y,


There is nothing wrong with "if you do X, I'll do Y".

To train MA is like to find the right key to open the right lock. With the right key, it takes very little effort to open that lock.

Example of "If you do X, I'll do Y".

If you

- punch my head, I'll kick your belly (my leg is longer than your arm).
- shoot at my leg, I'll push your head down (your body is close to the ground anyway).
- hip throw me, I'll spin with you and drag you down (I borrow your spinning force).
- sweep me, I'll raise my leg, let your leg to pass under, I then sweep back at you (use the same technique to attack you back).
- ...


----------



## Buka (Jun 1, 2017)

I wonder who's real life we are conjecturing about?

Yes, you can prepare but won't know how you will react to a given situation, but that preparation is training, a plan of options if you will. Options of the response.( Or options of the attack should you decide to move first  - given the opportunity.)

_It will rarely, if ever, happen according to any script, and this is especially true in a heated situation on the cusp of, or in the midst of, real combat. At that point the choreographer will be notably absent_......

I assume, perhaps mistakenly, that we are discussing self defense/fighting as opposed to actual military warfare when we speak of combat. If so, consider - self defense situations are not all that different in the grand scheme of things. Yes, the faces are different, the settings, the particulars, the landscape, the weapons, etc, but it's still just A (or several As) wanting to F up B.
And B not letting that happen.

While there may be no greater teacher than experience, there's a bootload, too many to count, actually, of people who have successfully defended themselves against attacks the very first time they were attacked after having trained.


----------



## CB Jones (Jun 1, 2017)

Not so much a script...but drilled combinations that become muscle memory upon certain stimuli I think is very realistic and works.

I react to your jab by slipping it and throwing a practiced combination back then react upon your next reaction.

I don't have to think about each technique to slip and punch,punch, and move it is muscle memory


----------



## lklawson (Jun 1, 2017)

Buka said:


> I assume, perhaps mistakenly, that we are discussing self defense/fighting as opposed to actual military warfare when we speak of combat.


Turns out that the human brain can't actually tell the difference between adrenal dump as a result of military combat, self defense, or even high-stress competitive "stage fright."

To the brain, adrenal dump is adrenal dump and it turns off the thinking fore-brain and turns on Robo Droid.  Robo Droid just follows his programming.  Whatever that programming may be.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 1, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> What he meant is what the OP is referring to: the fact that you will most likely never execute a string of techniques the way you do in class in a predetermined drill, with no resistance.


IMO, to train just "a string of techniques" is not enough. You will need to train "many strings of techniques".

When you kick, your opponent can

- block with his arm,
- block with his leg,
- move away.

There are 3 possible ways that your opponent may respond. You have to train all 3 outcomes from your opponent's respond.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 1, 2017)

Speaking of my claims about the benefits of Visualization, here's an article from Psychology Today supporting my claims.  It also includes a reference to another study which showed participants gaining 13% muscle mass from merely imagining themselves lifting weights!  

Seeing Is Believing: The Power of Visualization

The application is that you can totally use your imagination to get better at martial arts.






Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## jobo (Jun 1, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree. If you
> 
> - push on your opponent's chest, most of the time he will push back on you.
> - punch your opponent, most of the time he will punch you back.
> ...


yes the push response but more than that, if someone is walking towards you with their fist clenched, then its odds on that they intend to punch you and its a70% chance its a right.

if their hands are open then they intend to grab or head but you .

if they are running at you then its odds on they are coming in foot first or they are going to try and tackle you to the ground


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 1, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree. If you
> 
> - push on your opponent's chest, most of the time he will push back on you.
> - punch your opponent, most of the time he will punch you back.
> ...


Round here, it escalates much faster.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I was first going to place this in the WC forum, but it isn't a problem specific to that. Then, I was going to place it in CMM, but it isn't really specific to any one style..
> 
> This is something I see a lot in discussions around here, but not just here, pretty much whenever the subject is broached. It generally reads something like..
> 
> ...



Which is why at the start of a demo we get. "This is a combination that has worked for me" Rather than a combination that will get pulled off every time by every guy.

As we progress we move from fixed combos to ajusted combos depending on what the other guy does.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 1. Kick low, punch high - if you kick your opponent's groin, 90% chance that his face will be open for your punch.
> 2. Attack right then attack left - if you punch at your opponent's right shoulder, most of the time he will expose his left shoulder to you.
> 3. If you want push, you pull first - if you pull, 40% of chance that your opponent will resist. also 40% chance that he will yield.
> 4. Let your opponent to decide whether he want to escape, or resist - if you sweep your opponent's leg, 50% chance that he will lift up his leg. 50% chance that he will turn his shin bone to against you.
> ...


This is a fairly decent example. Where do you get those numbers? Who is this hypothetical 'he' that  is so predictable? I surely haven't met him.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> This is a fairly decent example. Where do you get those numbers? Who is this hypothetical 'he' that  is so predictable? I surely haven't met him.


As for the rest of you talking about repetition and conditioning responses..I totally agree. Getting this edge is why we train, right? Why we spend hours repeating one punch or one kick? At least for me.

But let's keep it real...it's an edge, not a superpower.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> This is a fairly decent example. Where do you get those numbers? Who is this hypothetical 'he' that  is so predictable? I surely haven't met him.


Every semester, during the 1st day of my UT Austin informal Kung Fu class, I told my 50 new students that I'll use "single leg" to take them down. I then tested on each and every new student. When I pulled them, almost 100% of the time they will resist. At the end of that semester, when I pulled them, 50% of the time they will resists, and 50% of the time they will yield. When the next semester begin, the same pattern will repeat all over again.

This tell me one thing. Beginners are very "honest". They only know how to use force to fight against force. After they have developed some experience, they start to understand how to "borrow their opponent's force". In other words, the ability to be able to borrow opponent's force will need some MA training. Beginners don't have that.

To be able to "predict" that most people will use force against force can give you some advantage.


----------



## jobo (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> As for the rest of you talking about repetition and conditioning responses..I totally agree. Getting this edge is why we train, right? Why we spend hours repeating one punch or one kick? At least for me.
> 
> But let's keep it real...it's an edge, not a superpower.


it can be close to that. The martial arts myth, is thats technique can overcome significant physical disadvantages. Or the best way to win a fight to to be stronger faster, more agile, better balanced with better cardio than your oppoinent. And be good a martial art. Or fight drunks when your sober, that always,funny. You should always be faster and better balanced than a drunk,


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Which is why at the start of a demo we get. "This is a combination that has worked for me" Rather than a combination that will get pulled off every time by every guy.
> 
> As we progress we move from fixed combos to ajusted combos depending on what the other guy does.


Combos are a different matter. You launch combos when you see openings, realizing they might not all land. If you said "I would throw a jab then when their head snaps back I'd throw a cross-hook-uppercut then step in diagonally and finish him with a roundhouse kick", then that would be what I am getting at.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Combos are a different matter. You launch combos when you see openings, realizing they might not all land. If you said "I would throw a jab then when their head snaps back I'd throw a cross-hook-uppercut then step in diagonally and finish him with a roundhouse kick", then that would be what I am getting at.


I think you have just reversed these 2 cases.

1. Combo is pre-defined attack sequence. You decide that combo sequence and not your opponent.
2. Attack whatever is open for you. You punch, your opponent blocks, he opens up another area, you then attack that new open area. Your opponent decides where he will open up and not you.

Anybody has done enough combo drill can execute that combo. Only people with good "listen ability" will be able to recognize the opportunity and catch that opportunity.

In the following clip, did he use "combo", or did he just attack whatever is open for him? IMO, he is doing 2 not 1.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Turns out that the human brain can't actually tell the difference between adrenal dump as a result of military combat, self defense, or even high-stress competitive "stage fright."
> 
> To the brain, adrenal dump is adrenal dump and it turns off the thinking fore-brain and turns on Robo Droid.  Robo Droid just follows his programming.  Whatever that programming may be.
> 
> ...


Agreed. The stress reactions are mostly misapplications of the chemical processes designed for fight/flight. Mild to moderate stress is a preparatory threat-detection state, while extreme stress (and transitions to anger) are further along the spectrum, including that adrenal dump you mention.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Combos are a different matter. You launch combos when you see openings, realizing they might not all land. If you said "I would throw a jab then when their head snaps back I'd throw a cross-hook-uppercut then step in diagonally and finish him with a roundhouse kick", then that would be what I am getting at.


Um, that's still a combination. The only difference is whether you absolutely believe you'll connect in that exact sequence or not. Nobody who trains with any resistance will have that belief. They'll know some of the odds, and be able to predict at better than chance, but they'll be ready for things to not follow the sequence, too.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Speaking of my claims about the benefits of Visualization, here's an article from Psychology Today supporting my claims.  It also includes a reference to another study which showed participants gaining 13% muscle mass from merely imagining themselves lifting weights!
> 
> Seeing Is Believing: The Power of Visualization
> 
> ...


There's an older study (mid-90's, I think) that showed people developing improved athletic skill (I've forgotten the task) from visualization at about 60% the rate of people physically practicing the skill, over a 6-week period. That's a hell of a gain without the need for recovery.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Which is why at the start of a demo we get. "This is a combination that has worked for me" Rather than a combination that will get pulled off every time by every guy.
> 
> As we progress we move from fixed combos to ajusted combos depending on what the other guy does.


This. Every "technique" we learn is a set of movements. A simple single-leg takedown isn't a single move, but an entry, a setup, and a takedown. At any point in that sequence, the other guy can change the circumstance, and we simply adjust to something that fits the new circumstance. That adjustment may mean an entirely different sequence, or it may simply replace one part (different set-up, perhaps), and still lead to the same end point.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> As for the rest of you talking about repetition and conditioning responses..I totally agree. Getting this edge is why we train, right? Why we spend hours repeating one punch or one kick? At least for me.
> 
> But let's keep it real...it's an edge, not a superpower.


Nobody has claimed it to be a superpower, that I've seen.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 1, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I think you have just reversed these 2 cases.
> 
> 1. Combo is pre-defined attack sequence. You decide that combo sequence and not your opponent.
> 2. Attack whatever is open for you. You punch, your opponent blocks, he opens up another area, you then attack that new open area. Your opponent decides where he will open up and not you.
> ...


The 1 2 was a planned combo, the rest just pocket brawling.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 1, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Combos are a different matter. You launch combos when you see openings, realizing they might not all land. If you said "I would throw a jab then when their head snaps back I'd throw a cross-hook-uppercut then step in diagonally and finish him with a roundhouse kick", then that would be what I am getting at.



There was a demo that went full retard on that. Called it the science of something and pretended they could then predict the future.

Scars mabye? 

I will have a look.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 2, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> There's an older study (mid-90's, I think) that showed people developing improved athletic skill (I've forgotten the task) from visualization at about 60% the rate of people physically practicing the skill, over a 6-week period. That's a hell of a gain without the need for recovery.


That was probably the Basketball Free Throws study.  It's mentioned in the Psychology Today article but basically, they had 3 groups.  A group that practiced free throws, one that just imagined practicing free throws, and a control that did neither.  While the group that actually practiced improved the most, the imagination group improved significantly as well.  Control, of course, showed no improvement.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Martial D (Jun 2, 2017)

I anxiously await the emergence of a pro athlete or fighter that has got to where he has by sitting and visualizing.  I agree it doesn't hurt, but you just won't get the physiological conditioning, nor is anything you visualize likely to reflect a reality you haven't actually experienced.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> That was probably the Basketball Free Throws study.  It's mentioned in the Psychology Today article but basically, they had 3 groups.  A group that practiced free throws, one that just imagined practicing free throws, and a control that did neither.  While the group that actually practiced improved the most, the imagination group improved significantly as well.  Control, of course, showed no improvement.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Yes, I think that is the one. I forget the details on a regular basis, and have to keep looking it up to cite it.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 2, 2017)

Martial D said:


> I anxiously await the emergence of a pro athlete or fighter that has got to where he has by sitting and visualizing.


I eagerly await the emergence of a cogent response instead of a Straw Man argument.



> I agree it doesn't hurt, but you just won't get the physiological conditioning, nor is anything you visualize likely to reflect a reality you haven't actually experienced.


Shockingly, no one suggested that.    What has been pointed out is that Visualization Drills have been an important component of modern training, particularly within professional sports training.  Perhaps you should take a bit of time and look into the actual claims being made instead of knocking down straw men.  The Russians totally revolutionized sports training in the 70's, partially using these techniques to improve the performance of their Olympic athletes.

Frankly these appeals to Straw Men are becoming a pattern with you.


----------



## jobo (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> I eagerly await the emergence of a cogent response instead of a Straw Man argument.
> 
> Shockingly, no one suggested that.    What has been pointed out is that Visualization Drills have been an important component of modern training, particularly within professional sports training.  Perhaps you should take a bit of time and look into the actual claims being made instead of knocking down straw men.  The Russians totally revolutionized sports training in the 70's, partially using these techniques to improve the performance of their Olympic athletes.
> 
> Frankly these appeals to Straw Men are becoming a pattern with you.


that's where sports science starts to blend with chi, once you are accepting that visualisation and meditation can significantly improve performance,bit opens up other areas for serious consideration


----------



## Martial D (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> I eagerly await the emergence of a cogent response instead of a Straw Man argument.
> 
> Shockingly, no one suggested that.    What has been pointed out is that Visualization Drills have been an important component of modern training, particularly within professional sports training.  Perhaps you should take a bit of time and look into the actual claims being made instead of knocking down straw men.  The Russians totally revolutionized sports training in the 70's, partially using these techniques to improve the performance of their Olympic athletes.
> 
> Frankly these appeals to Straw Men are becoming a pattern with you.



It is one of life's special ironies when the accusation of using a straw man argument is itself a straw man argument.

Someone claimed visualization was 60% as effective as actual training vis a vis results.  If that were true we should expect to see at least lower teir top athletes that don't train at all.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 2, 2017)

Martial D said:


> It is one of life's special ironies when the accusation of using a straw man argument is itself a straw man argument.
> 
> Someone claimed visualization was 60% as effective as actual training vis a vis results.  If that were true we should expect to see at least lower teir top athletes that don't train at all.


60% improvement in technique != 60% all around improvement


----------



## lklawson (Jun 2, 2017)

Martial D said:


> It is one of life's special ironies when the accusation of using a straw man argument is itself a straw man argument.


Speaking of "special" ...you must be.  Perhaps you should google up what a Straw Man argument is.  It is apparent that you don't seem to know.



> Someone claimed visualization was 60% as effective as actual training vis a vis results.  If that were true we should expect to see at least lower teir top athletes that don't train at all.


First, I didn't write that so I'm not planning on defending it.  Second, it's still pretty clear that you have no frigg'n clue what Visualization Drills are or how they are applied in sports and combat psychology.  Go educate yourself and stop blabbering in ignorance.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jun 2, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Someone claimed visualization was 60% as effective as actual training vis a vis results. If that were true we should expect to see at least lower teir top athletes that don't train at all.


Training only 60% as effectively as the competition doesn't get you even into the lower tier of top athletes.

Also, that 60% strictly applies to skill acquisition (training the nervous system), not to developing power or conditioning or other physiological adaptations. I don't care how skilled you are, you don't get to be a top athlete without those physical attributes.

The main virtues of visualization training, IMHO, are as follows:


It allows the practitioner to do additional skill practice after they have already done enough physical training that they need rest to avoid injuries and allow recovery.
It allows a practitioner to rehearse moves which require a partner when there is no partner available.
It allows the practitioner to work on building or maintaining skill in circumstances where physical practice isn't practical (ex - sitting on a plane)
BTW, that 60% figure comes from a specific study for a specific skill set for a specific population. There are a lot of factors which can affect it. The more skilled and knowledgeable the practitioner is for the skills at hand, the more benefit they will get*. The more they understand the exact details of the movement they are practicing, the more benefit they will get. I suspect there are also natural individual differences in the ability to focus and mentally rehearse skills.

*(It's not uncommon these days for me to study a new BJJ technique on video, spend time mentally rehearsing it, and then successfully execute it in sparring in my next class without ever having physically drilled it with a live partner. I would not have been able to do that 15 years ago.)


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Visualization Drills have been an important component of modern training,


it was a component of old training as well in Asia.  there is this thing they call kata, where you physically move thru space as you imagine attacks coming at you.

you modern warriors should try it sometime.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 2, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> it was a component of old training as well in Asia.  there is this thing they call kata, where you physically move thru space as you imagine attacks coming at you.
> 
> you modern warriors should try it sometime.


Hahaha.  Props bro.  There's still no real consensus of what Kata is, its purpose, or the benefits thereof.  Ask 6 different martial artists and you'll get 9 different answers.    If you use Kata as a component of Visualization Drills, then I have little doubt that it can be effectively applied in that manner.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> So your thesis has a small problem. It is a classical conditioning fact, taken advantage of by sports trainers, shooters, LEO, and the military, that when presented with a visual stimuli that the person *WILL* respond with a programmed technique or series of techniques.



small problem with this thesis.  
the issue is that the stimuli within martial arts training often does not look like the stimuli that will be encountered in real situations.
thus the brain will draw a blank when looking for the response.
this is what i meant when i posted that the reality within the dojo must match the street reality.
not all arts practice the same so some will match but many wont.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> There's still no real consensus of what Kata is, its purpose,


the purpose is what ever you use it for.   i use it as visualization and muscle memory, stimulus, response training as well as hard wiring things like visual scanning of the area for threats and other things.  other people may have no use for kata.  but my personal kata are not the same ones used by most karate students so i dont have a lot of the same bunkai or mechanics issues that others have.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Speaking of "special" ...you must be.  Perhaps you should google up what a Straw Man argument is.  It is apparent that you don't seem to know.
> 
> First, I didn't write that so I'm not planning on defending it.  Second, it's still pretty clear that you have no frigg'n clue what Visualization Drills are or how they are applied in sports and combat psychology.  Go educate yourself and stop blabbering in ignorance.


Blah blah blah. I'd put my logic skills against anyone. If you don't understand why you conjuring up a straw man straw man is itself a straw man, that's on you..but I'm afraid I'm not going to chase your red herring any further away from the topic. What you think of what I think just isn't important enough to me.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 2, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> it was a component of old training as well in Asia.  there is this thing they call kata, where you physically move thru space as you imagine attacks coming at you.
> 
> you modern warriors should try it sometime.


You guys act like tma has a monopoly on this stuff. I guess the words shadow boxing don't ring a bell? 

Nobody is saying visualization is useless, but there is a point at which it spills over into play acting.


----------



## Ironbear24 (Jun 2, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> I suspect the problem is that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of your training.
> You're not being taught techniques. It just looks like you are. What you're really being taught is movement, balance, timing, positioning, etc. When you understand the principles behind the "techniques" used as teaching tools, you'll move in the correct and appropriate way in pretty much any circumstance.



In Kenpo and many styles there are techniques where if enemy does this you do that. For example there is sword of destruction to deal with a left straight, you block it with an outward block with left hand,front kick the groin with left leg or the stomach, then bring with down on their colar bone with a chop with the left hand, it's basically delayed sword but done with the other side instead of the right side.

I have never done this or any kenpo technique in a real life situation, however doing these drills I feel gave me the understanding of "what to do" in a fight.

For example instead of delayed sword or any of the hundreds of fancy pants named techniques made to deal with a left jab. I did a simple inward block with my left hand and stepped in with a right hook, then knee to the stomach, grab their head and cross step turning them over to the floor.

I didn't use sword of destruction but I used the principles that these many techniques showed me, which enabled me to do my own thing. I feel this is supposed to be the result of all the rehearsed technique training.


----------



## lklawson (Jun 2, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> small problem with this thesis.
> the issue is that the stimuli within martial arts training often does not look like the stimuli that will be encountered in real situations.


That's an issue with trying to apply any Classical Conditioning response to a visualization drill.  Doesn't have to be "martial arts."   Could just as easily be tennis or something else.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jun 2, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> the purpose is what ever you use it for.   i use it as visualization and muscle memory, stimulus, response training as well as hard wiring things like visual scanning of the area for threats and other things.  other people may have no use for kata.


Fair enough.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jun 2, 2017)

Martial D said:


> Blah blah blah. I'd put my logic skills against anyone. If you don't understand why you conjuring up a straw man straw man is itself a straw man, that's on you..but I'm afraid I'm not going to chase your red herring any further away from the topic. What you think of what I think just isn't important enough to me.


Did you come up with that nonsense all on you own?

Never mind.  It doesn't matter.

The point is that you have repeatedly attributed positions to posters in this thread which they did not take.  You have also repeatedly demonstrated by your writing that you don't really know what Visualization Drills are or how they're used.  Simply put, you're not educated about them and you keep trying to obfuscate with Straw Man attacks.

I understand that you are upset that your initial statement was disproved, but this behavior isn't going to help.  Normally, your best bet would have been to just go, "OK, I see your point."  However, by now, I'm not sure there's any rescue for your position.  Now your best be is to quit before you get further behind.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Did you come up with that nonsense all on you own?
> 
> Never mind.  It doesn't matter.
> 
> ...


Hubris.

You done ranting? Take a deep breath.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 2, 2017)

Martial D said:


> It is one of life's special ironies when the accusation of using a straw man argument is itself a straw man argument.
> 
> Someone claimed visualization was 60% as effective as actual training vis a vis results.  If that were true we should expect to see at least lower teir top athletes that don't train at all.


I just pointed out the results of an actual experiment. If you don't agree, challenge the experiment.

60% of the results would not be good enough for to make the lower tier of top athletes. The discrepancy between top and lower tiers of those folks isn't that big. Add to that the fact that pretty much all top-tier athletes use visualization, and you get an even larger discrepancy, should someone choose only to use the visualization.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 2, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Hahaha.  Props bro.  There's still no real consensus of what Kata is, its purpose, or the benefits thereof.  Ask 6 different martial artists and you'll get 9 different answers.    If you use Kata as a component of Visualization Drills, then I have little doubt that it can be effectively applied in that manner.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


One of the reasons I introduced kata was to give students a way to practice visualizing. I found that many, when they start, are unable to visualize where the other person is. They need practice at that, and kata seems to help (still early in the process), at least when I force them to move as if there was an actual person there.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 2, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> small problem with this thesis.
> the issue is that the stimuli within martial arts training often does not look like the stimuli that will be encountered in real situations.
> thus the brain will draw a blank when looking for the response.
> this is what i meant when i posted that the reality within the dojo must match the street reality.
> not all arts practice the same so some will match but many wont.


That's why there should be an attempt made to create things that look like what's likely to happen, and to practice lots of different variations (which often comes in sparring/randori/rolling), so your brain gets used to recognizing a lot of different stimuli. I even prefer to work knife defense with a metal knife, rather than wood, for this reason.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> As we progress we move from fixed combos to ajusted combos depending on what the other guy does.


IMO, your "fixed combos" training should also cover "adjusted combos" training. I don't believe anybody can pull up a "adjusted combo" in fighting if he had not trained it before.

For example, when you sweep your opponent's leg, his head may open for your hook kick. But if you have not trained foot sweep, hook kick combo, even if the opportunity may be there, you may not be able to catch that opponent fast enough.


----------



## Ironbear24 (Jun 2, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> One of the reasons I introduced kata was to give students a way to practice visualizing. I found that many, when they start, are unable to visualize where the other person is. They need practice at that, and kata seems to help (still early in the process), at least when I force them to move as if there was an actual person there.



Why not just do bunkai so a person is there? Or is the purpose to build visualizations?


----------



## drop bear (Jun 2, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, your "fixed combos" training should also cover "adjusted combos" training. I don't believe anybody can pull up a "adjusted combo" in fighting if he had not trained it before.
> 
> For example, when you sweep your opponent's leg, his head may open for your hook kick. But if you have not trained foot sweep, hook kick combo, even if the opportunity may be there, you may not be able to catch that opponent fast enough.



You can have a guess at what a person will do though. 

Striking low then high is pretty common.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You can have a guess at what a person will do though.
> 
> Striking low then high is pretty common.


But if one has never trained "hook kick" in his life, even if the opportunity is there, he won't be able to catch it.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 2, 2017)

drop bear said:


> There was a demo that went full retard on that. Called it the science of something and pretended they could then predict the future.
> 
> Scars mabye?
> 
> I will have a look.








Auto kinematics. Is the term.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 3, 2017)

One reason to practice kata alone rather than with a partner can be so you can use full speed/power. Which you can't use on a person with some of the techniques (depending on your version of bunkai of course).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 3, 2017)

Ironbear24 said:


> Why not just do bunkai so a person is there? Or is the purpose to build visualizations?


Part of the purpose is to build that visualization ability. It helps for times when you can't keep your eyes on the person, or when lighting is poor. It also helps for solo practice, and seems to assist in pattern matching.


----------



## JP3 (Jun 3, 2017)

Martial D said:


> And of those situations, how many were something you could have predicted, resulting in a prescripted set of moves that actually happened as you expected?


I think you missed DirtyDog's point.  His responsive moves were not "prescripted."  His reflexive principles were, however.

Since you've not used the word principles yet, I am wondering if you never got this kind of teaching.

And I totally agree with you on Muay Thai being a wonderful illusion-crusher. It did the same thing for me.

As did judo, about 15 years later.

As did BJJ about 10 years after that.


----------



## JP3 (Jun 3, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> One reason to practice kata alone rather than with a partner can be so you can use full speed/power. Which you can't use on a person with some of the techniques (depending on your version of bunkai of course).


Correction:  You CAN do them full power... but you run out of people willing, or able,  to train with you during the next class.


----------



## JP3 (Jun 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Part of the purpose is to build that visualization ability. It helps for times when you can't keep your eyes on the person, or when lighting is poor. It also helps for solo practice, and seems to assist in pattern matching.


And... for those times where there is an odd number of people.


----------



## JP3 (Jun 3, 2017)

For Martial D, I didn't read pages 2-4, so you may have used the word "principle" in there. My bad if so. I think my thought is still valid though and I am curious.


----------



## Ironbear24 (Jun 3, 2017)

JP3 said:


> I think you missed DirtyDog's point.  His responsive moves were not "prescripted."  His reflexive principles were, however.
> 
> Since you've not used the word principles yet, I am wondering if you never got this kind of teaching.
> 
> ...



What "illusions" exactly were crushed?


----------



## Martial D (Jun 3, 2017)

JP3 said:


> I think you missed DirtyDog's point.  His responsive moves were not "prescripted."  His reflexive principles were, however.
> 
> Since you've not used the word principles yet, I am wondering if you never got this kind of teaching.
> 
> ...



Yes, BJJ was an eye opener. If you don't have real grappling training, there is literally nothing you can do once a good BJJ guys gets ahold of you. Humbling.

But anyway, yes I understand about training reflexes through repetition, muscle memory, etc (although the term reflexive principle has never come up afaik), but that's not the point. I've never argued against that. Why would I train martial arts at all if I didn't believe it was doing anything? The whole point is to train movements to be automatic.

The point, of which many seem to feel implicated(the old saying applies..if you think they are talking about you, they probably are), is that a fight, a real fight, isn't a predictable narrative you can build prior to combat and proceed to execute step by step. It just isn't.

If you do not hold the position that it is(the proverbial you), then why even argue?


----------



## drop bear (Jun 3, 2017)

JP3 said:


> Correction:  You CAN do them full power... but you run out of people willing, or able,  to train with you during the next class.



I have plenty of partners who will let me train full power.  I don't because someone would have to scoop me up with a trowel afterwards.

There is even a little speech made before sparring to pretty much that. It ends with if you start you have to finish. There is no running off mid round.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 4, 2017)

Martial D said:


> If you do not hold the position that it is(the proverbial you), then why even argue?


Because the point was made, and then made more emphatically, as if someone were saying something that made the point more necessary. I really haven't heard/seen anyone say anything that supports your notion that people believe that. I'm sure some do, but I've not seen a point made here from which one could actually infer that conclusion.

Oh, and because it helps us practice explaining to students who don't yet get it. That's a lot of why I carry on some of the discussions I get into here. I encourage my students to challenge what they are taught. Often, what they come up with (what if's) is easily answered, because it's stuff we've been working on for a long time. Sometimes they come up with something that I don't have to talk about often, and MT is a good place to find out what explanations are most helpful (resolve the question, without ending their questioning).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> I have plenty of partners who will let me train full power.  I don't because someone would have to scoop me up with a trowel afterwards.
> 
> There is even a little speech made before sparring to pretty much that. It ends with if you start you have to finish. There is no running off mid round.


Even with those folks, you couldn't safely do some of your techniques full-power/full-speed if you got into position to do them fully. (I'm talking about submissions like an arm bar lock or shoulder lock, where full power is never applied in training.)


----------



## drop bear (Jun 4, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Even with those folks, you couldn't safely do some of your techniques full-power/full-speed if you got into position to do them fully. (I'm talking about submissions like an arm bar lock or shoulder lock, where full power is never applied in training.)



Arm bars and submissions dont really sort of work because they are full contact though. They work because you cant get out of them.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Arm bars and submissions dont really sort of work because they are full contact though. They work because you cant get out of them.


Agreed. I was just pointing out that this is probably what JP was referring to. If you actually went full-power all the way on those techniques, you'd run out of partners quickly. There are things we can do full-tilt, and things we have to hold back on. There are some things that fall in-between. I can throw full-force with many of my throws, against someone who has very good ukemi, but I can't do it often, because it's really hard on training partners to take falls that hard.


----------



## jobo (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Arm bars and submissions dont really sort of work because they are full contact though. They work because you cant get out of them.


an arm bar full power is a broken arm, or at least badly damaged tendons.if you are fighting submission then it is by definition light contact


----------



## drop bear (Jun 4, 2017)

jobo said:


> an arm bar full power is a broken arm, or at least badly damaged tendons.



Not really. If an arm bar is done right. It doesnt matter what speed it is done.


----------



## jobo (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Not really. If an arm bar is done right. It doesnt matter what speed it is done.


I didn't any anything about speed, I said full power, though speed is a part of that. There are to purposes to an arm bar or wrist lock, 1) to cause enough pain that they give up2) to cause as much damage as you can so they are incapable f Carry on


----------



## drop bear (Jun 4, 2017)

jobo said:


> I didn't any anything about speed, I said full power, though speed is a part of that. There are to purposes to an arm bar or wrist lock, 1) to cause enough pain that they give up2) to cause as much damage as you can so they are incapable f Carry on



Not really


----------



## jobo (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Not really


yes really, in street fighting if no interest in getting a submission, they are quite likely to come back with a weapon. Il damage the arm so it no longer works.
in ring work that considered bad form and in sparring work very much so


----------



## drop bear (Jun 4, 2017)

jobo said:


> yes really, in street fighting if no interest in getting a submission, they are quite likely to come back with a weapon. Il damage the arm so it no longer works.
> in ring work that considered bad form and in sparring work very much so



You are welcome to do what you want but an arm bar is ultimately about position not submission.


----------



## jobo (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You are welcome to do what you want but an arm bar is ultimately about position not submission.


in ring work its about getting a tap out so you win. Back in the real world, there are no submission not referee and no score card. He can give in all he likes, I'm wrecking that arm.
I learnt at an early age that to fight anything but full on meant you would end up getting hurt yourself. I let some on. Go once and they came back with a base ball bat. They wouldn't be doing with that if I had broke their arm


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You are welcome to do what you want but an arm bar is ultimately about position not submission.


Agreed, especially in a self-defense context (I'll let others speak to the competition context) - use it to gain control and gain position for continued control, whether by that technique or something else. Is that what you were saying? That's especially true when an arm bar is used as a takedown (rather than a pin or submission).

However, if the lock is done full-force and full-speed in training, it would likely be a dislocation (no time to tap out). I think that's what he's getting at.


----------



## jobo (Jun 4, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Agreed, especially in a self-defense context (I'll let others speak to the competition context) - use it to gain control and gain position for continued control, whether by that technique or something else. Is that what you were saying? That's especially true when an arm bar is used as a takedown (rather than a pin or submission).
> 
> However, if the lock is done full-force and full-speed in training, it would likely be a dislocation (no time to tap out). I think that's what he's getting at.


nearly but not quite, in a real fight its about gaining position, gaining control and then causing significant damage so the fight is over. There are no submissions' in a street fight. The. Fight is over when one,side is incapable of carrying on.

I'm beginning to thing that a lot of the people who are cheer leading for mma and similar haven't got a great deal of experience with actual real word fights. People submit and then quite contrary to the rules of mma pick up a brick and hit you with it or go to their car and produce a bat or a wrench


----------



## JP3 (Jun 4, 2017)

Ironbear24 said:


> What "illusions" exactly were crushed?


OK, in sequence...

Coming out of the TKD/HKD, in which I thought I was pretty bad-*** (previous posts about 20-something JP3 inserted here) I thought that I'd walk into the Thai-boxing gym and destroy those guys with my kicks.

....ooops... never even got a chance to really throw them. Hard to do when someone Knows that's what you're about and they are out to take your head off with traditional boxing combos.  Then, when you've figured out what it means to Really "keep your hands up" they turned to destroying my base, kicking the legs themselves.... Man! It is Really distracting to take a leg kick when you have no idea how to deal with it.

I got better. Figured out the cues. Learned that, even though I've got the wingspan of a orangutan I'm best working inside with short, choppy strikes, knees and elbows and when they back out to get out of the woodchipper That's when the head kicks get landed.

So, my new Muay Thai self heads off to a new city for more school, and I can't keep doing the MT, so I met a guy who has a TKD/Judo school, and I start that.

I never knew that it was so easy to dump me on my a$$ all that time. Again, I wanted to learn big, super-nifty throws, but what I found out was that what I was good at were the ashi-waza, like the sweeps and reaps... probably because of all the leg/foot control coming out of TKD/HKD and MT.

Then, a judo 2nd dan under my belt, I thought I was all that ont he ground, so I started going to BJJ class. In the first class, I crushed the drills, got sweaty int he conditioning... and got tapped int he first minute of my first free-roll with a blue belt which I outweighed by probably 50 pounds.  Triangle choke. Felt like my head was going to pop off and land outside.

Since then, I've developed a lot more patience, use way less energy, and flow from one spot tot he other without locking things down and just ... wait ont he other guy to make a mistake. Sometimes he/she does, sometimes not, but I've not been tapped in a bit, so that's good.


----------



## JP3 (Jun 4, 2017)

Martial D said:


> a fight, a real fight, isn't a predictable narrative you can build prior to combat and proceed to execute step by step. It just isn't.
> 
> If you do not hold the position that it is(the proverbial you), then why even argue?


The top sentence above... I agree with.  I didn't take that to be your initial meaning int he O/P though.

What I'm understanding from you is that you're saying, "If you think that a fight is going to be Step 1, Step 2, Step 3 etc and then around Step 7 the person will be on the ground unconscious." Is flawed, fallacious, and misleading.

I can agree witht hat. Is that accurate?


----------



## JP3 (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> I have plenty of partners who will let me train full power.  I don't because someone would have to scoop me up with a trowel afterwards.
> 
> There is even a little speech made before sparring to pretty much that. It ends with if you start you have to finish. There is no running off mid round.



The 25 y/o me would have loved that gym, Drop.

The 35 y/o me would frown a little and just go lift weights.

The 45 y/o me says, "Way to go! Atta boy!" to you, and heads off to get a beer.


----------



## JP3 (Jun 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Arm bars and submissions dont really sort of work because they are full contact though. They work because you cant get out of them.



Let's all keep in mind that the only reason that an arm bar "exists" is because we don't just break the arm.

And... the reason we don't just break the arm is?

1.  We want to be able to play again, tomorrow.

2.  We don't want them to break OUR own arm.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 4, 2017)

JP3 said:


> The top sentence above... I agree with.  I didn't take that to be your initial meaning int he O/P though.
> 
> What I'm understanding from you is that you're saying, "If you think that a fight is going to be Step 1, Step 2, Step 3 etc and then around Step 7 the person will be on the ground unconscious." Is flawed, fallacious, and misleading.
> 
> I can agree witht hat. Is that accurate?


 I'd stop at around step 2, but ya pretty much.


----------



## jobo (Jun 4, 2017)

JP3 said:


> Let's all keep in mind that the only reason that an arm bar "exists" is because we don't just break the arm.
> 
> And... the reason we don't just break the arm is?
> 
> ...


this, very much so. The mma is watered down techneques for sanitised sports fighting, people get,a bit hurt, but serolious injuries' are very rare.

people mock the to deadly to spar idea, but with the style I do a large % of the techniques are to dangerous to spar. I have to stop my spinning,arm bar before I actually break someone's arm. my side kick / stamp to the knee cant be done real time as it would result in breaking the knee and my groin punches have to be pulled for the sake of both decency and the injuries they would cause. The result is I'm dependent on learning skill I can never use unless its the real world. Where the mma have lesser skills that then can actually practise for real

but then I can practise rolling around on the ground a bit and throwing a few kicks and punches as well. So I think im in a better position


----------



## drop bear (Jun 4, 2017)

jobo said:


> this, very much so. The mma is watered down techneques for sanitised sports fighting, people get,a bit hurt, but serolious injuries' are very rare.
> 
> people mock the to deadly to spar idea, but with the style I do a large % of the techniques are to dangerous to spar. I have to stop my spinning,arm bar before I actually break someone's arm. my side kick / stamp to the knee cant be done real time as it would result in breaking the knee and my groin punches have to be pulled for the sake of both decency and the injuries they would cause. The result is I'm dependent on learning skill I can never use unless its the real world. Where the mma have lesser skills that then can actually practise for real
> 
> but then I can practise rolling around on the ground a bit and throwing a few kicks and punches as well. So I think im in a better position



If you can drop a guy with sanitised techniques. You should be more dangerous when allowed to use unsanitised ones.

And side kick stamp on the knee is a sanitised technique. It just doesn't work like you were told it does.

You can spinning arm bar all you want as well. Break the thing off. It has happened before.


----------



## jobo (Jun 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> If you can drop a guy with sanitised techniques. You should be more dangerous when allowed to use unsanitised ones.
> 
> And side kick stamp on the knee is a sanitised technique. It just doesn't work like you were told it does.
> 
> You can spinning arm bar all you want as well. Break the thing off. It has happened before.


as a general rule 50% of mma fighter's lose, sp clearly their techneque didn't work. A fighting style that only wins half the time its used is clearly not very good


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> as a general rule 50% of mma fighter's lose, sp clearly their techneque didn't work. A fighting style that only wins half the time its used is clearly not very good



I wouldn't say it's their techniques that didn't work, I'd say it was their tactics that didn't. It could also be they chose the wrong opponent which happens quite a lot, people over estimating their experience and strength. A problem unique to competition of course, not applicable to the outside world.


----------



## jobo (Jun 5, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I wouldn't say it's their techniques that didn't work, I'd say it was their tactics that didn't. It could also be they chose the wrong opponent which happens quite a lot, people over estimating their experience and strength. A problem unique to competition of course, not applicable to the outside world.


its very hard to split techniques and tatics, they are rather dependent on each other. If your technique isn't good your tactics doesn't work, if your tatics are poor your techniques' won't work. I put them in one big box. For instance if someone lunges to grab or push me I grab or their wrists and run backwards. This is both a techneque and a tactic.

most have to practise the techniques' of most tatics and the tatics of most techniques'


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> its very hard to split techniques and tatics, they are rather dependent on each other. If your technique isn't good your tactics doesn't work, if your tatics are poor your techniques' won't work. I put them in one big box. For instance if someone lunges to grab or push me I grab or their wrists and run backwards. This is both a techneque and a tactic.
> 
> most have to practise the techniques' of most tatics and the tatics of most techniques'



I've seen, in fact reffed fighters with really good techniques and really bad tactics sometimes it the corner's faults when the fighter is inexperienced though The thing I love is the spectator's advice shouted out, their tactics are wonderful lol. experience usually sorts it all out, hence the expression there's no losers in an MMA fight, you may lose the fight but you win in gaining experience.


----------



## jobo (Jun 5, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I've seen, in fact reffed fighters with really good techniques and really bad tactics sometimes it the corner's faults when the fighter is inexperienced though The thing I love is the spectator's advice shouted out, their tactics are wonderful lol. experience usually sorts it all out, hence the expression there's no losers in an MMA fight, you may lose the fight but you win in gaining experience.


off course there are losers, that's this nonsense about taking part being a win. Or that getting your brains scrambled is good for experience.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> off course there are losers, that's this nonsense about taking part being a win. Or that getting your brains scrambled is good for experience.



Sigh. It's nothing to do with taking part being a win, the 'winning' part is that when you lose you learn so much, you analyse why you lost, what you should have done, why they were better than you, that whole thing. When people win their bout they tend to leave it at celebrating ( the very best fighters however analyse their winning fights as well as their losing ones, that's what makes them the best) and forget to look at what they could have done better/differently.


----------



## jobo (Jun 5, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Sigh. It's nothing to do with taking part being a win, the 'winning' part is that when you lose you learn so much, you analyse why you lost, what you should have done, why they were better than you, that whole thing. When people win their bout they tend to leave it at celebrating ( the very best fighters however analyse their winning fights as well as their losing ones, that's what makes them the best) and forget to look at what they could have done better/differently.


and if the oppoinent was faster and stronger than them what do the learn, other than they are not fast enough or,strong enough. A loss at chess can be analysed for improvement. Not so much a fight. The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn


----------



## lklawson (Jun 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You are welcome to do what you want but an arm bar is ultimately about position not submission.


There are all kinds of reasons why someone might be able to slap on a bar/choke/sub/whatever.  "Position" is what you have after you get there.  It's hard to make up for bad technique ("position") with superior strength, speed, or whatever.  "Position" is what ensures that a smaller, weaker, person can hold the sub and make it work.  However, speed, strength, deception, misdirection, partner's inattention or inexperience can all contribute to successfully getting "position."

I've seen any number of different attempts to break down application of a successful technique into "phases," but one way is to separate it into two parts.  1) Getting there 2) Got it.  "Position" ensures 2.  Number 1 can be influenced by any number of factors which are not necessarily "position."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jun 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> The. Fight is over when one,side is incapable of carrying on.


Or when one side decides that fighting isn't worth it (or is no longer worth it) and walks away and when the other side decides to let the first walk away.  That may or may not include anyone being injured.

I have a friend who got into a "Knife Fight."  It started off with a dude getting pissed and he snicks out his tac-folder.  My friend snaps out his tac-folder in response.  The both stare at each other for a second.  The first guy decides that his plan just went sideways, cautiously backs to a point where he feels safe, then turns and walks away.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## jobo (Jun 5, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Or when one side decides that fighting isn't worth it (or is no longer worth it) and walks away and when the other side decides to let the first walk away.  That may or may not include anyone being injured.
> 
> I have a friend who got into a "Knife Fight."  It started off with a dude getting pissed and he snicks out his tac-folder.  My friend snaps out his tac-folder in response.  The both stare at each other for a second.  The first guy decides that his plan just went sideways, cautiously backs to a point where he feels safe, then turns and walks away.
> 
> ...


well yes it depend on context, but I've had fights where, the other has submitted and then returned with a weapon. I had fight in a pub over a game of pool, I put him in arm lock and he gave up and came back Minuets later  with a claw hammer. Then o had to fight him again only this time at a huge disadvantage.
generaly, if the other guy is the attacker and it goes hands on, its wise to make sure he won't be,coming back. At least not today


----------



## lklawson (Jun 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> well yes it depend on context, but I've had fights where, the other has submitted and then returned with a weapon. I had fight in a pub over a game of pool, I put him in arm lock and he gave up and came back Minuets later  with a claw hammer. Then o had to fight him again only this time at a huge disadvantage.
> generaly, if the other guy is the attacker and it goes hands on, its wise to make sure he won't be,coming back. At least not today


Yup.  

"Fight" is an ill defined and vague thing which actively defies attempts to quantify.  Like Baby, nobody puts "fight" in a corner.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> and if the oppoinent was faster and stronger than them what do the learn, other than they are not fast enough or,strong enough. A loss at chess can be analysed for improvement. Not so much a fight. The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn



Speak for yourself, there's always a lot to learn, to think there isn't would be a mistake. If they aren't fast enough, they learn to get faster, if they aren't strong enough they learn to get stronger. If 'a guy hit me', you learn to not get hit. If you don't see what can be learnt during a competitive bout then you don't understand the fight game at all.


----------



## JbrmWC (Jun 28, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Speak for yourself, there's always a lot to learn, to think there isn't would be a mistake. If they aren't fast enough, they learn to get faster, if they aren't strong enough they learn to get stronger. If 'a guy hit me', you learn to not get hit. If you don't see what can be learnt during a competitive bout then you don't understand the fight game at all.


Agreed


----------



## pgsmith (Jun 28, 2017)

jobo said:


> well yes it depend on context, but I've had fights where, the other has submitted and then returned with a weapon. I had fight in a pub over a game of pool, I put him in arm lock and he gave up and came back Minuets later  with a claw hammer. Then o had to fight him again only this time at a huge disadvantage.
> generaly, if the other guy is the attacker and it goes hands on, its wise to make sure he won't be,coming back. At least not today



  I agree, as this is one of my philosophies on life. I never engage in fights unless I am absolutely forced to, as I was involved in some pretty horrific ones in my youth. However, if I am forced to fight, I assume the other fellow is trying to kill me and I'll do my best to make absolutely certain that he can't. Just explaining this has gotten me out of several potential fights as many testosterone laden fools are unwilling to actually risk dying rather than bruises to prove their point.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 28, 2017)

jobo said:


> and if the oppoinent was faster and stronger than them what do the learn, other than they are not fast enough or,strong enough. A loss at chess can be analysed for improvement. Not so much a fight. The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn


Distance is your best friend.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 28, 2017)

Touch Of Death said:


> Distance is your best friend.


Indeed. Preferably a kilometre or more


----------



## Steve (Jun 28, 2017)

lklawson said:


> Or when one side decides that fighting isn't worth it (or is no longer worth it) and walks away and when the other side decides to let the first walk away.  That may or may not include anyone being injured.
> 
> I have a friend who got into a "Knife Fight."  It started off with a dude getting pissed and he snicks out his tac-folder.  My friend snaps out his tac-folder in response.  The both stare at each other for a second.  The first guy decides that his plan just went sideways, cautiously backs to a point where he feels safe, then turns and walks away.
> 
> ...


I got into a knife fight 30 years ago in high school.   I was punching a guy.  He pulled out a knife, and I immediately turned around and ran into traffic.   Maybe not the smartest move on my part, but I figured keeping a metro bus between us was a good idea.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 29, 2017)

jobo said:


> The guy hit me, I fell down , what's to learn


Don't get hit.


----------



## jobo (Jun 29, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Don't get hit.


I suspect that if your going down with a single punch, don't get in fights would be the best lesson


----------



## drop bear (Jun 29, 2017)

jobo said:


> I suspect that if your going down with a single punch, don't get in fights would be the best lesson



Can happen to anyone.


----------



## Juany118 (Jun 29, 2017)

Martial D said:


> It isn't me that has misunderstood anything, but many many people seem to misunderstand the nature of actual combat.
> 
> You, in a way, just did the very thing I was referring to. You just assume your body will respond in the 'right way'. Have you tested that?



I have a pretty good experience with combat.  I also know that I am not taught individual techniques, I am taught a skill.  I know that my body will react in accordance to how I have studied and there is even dash cam and cell block video to show it.  I may not know which art I used, in the moment, (I am familiar enough with 3 to just "do it") but in looking back, or the video I can say "yep that was what I have trained to do." 

Now, does this require pressure testing while you train? Imo yes, just learning the skills the skills doesn't work, you have to use them under pressure so you learn to cope with the adrenaline rush that can make fine motor skills out the window (again just my opinion).  The problem is this people don't do this.  To many MA schools, again just my opinion/experience, don't do real pressure testing because that can lead to bumps and bruises, even the (very) occasional ER trip and that is bad for business.  This is why it too me over a year to find my current teacher.  Finding one with the appreciation for the "art" side of TMA, and who also teaches what they now call "combatives." I kept finding one or the other in my area, glad I finally found both.

Short form, if in a real fight or competition, the problem is usually not the method, often not even the practitioner, rather how the practitioner was trained.


----------



## Juany118 (Jun 29, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Can happen to anyone.



This.  No one is perfect and the right shot in the right place at the right time will drop anyone.


----------

