A police takedown.

[Hanzou]

Interesting. I learned that takedown in Relson Gracie fundamentals years ago.

 

[JowGaWolf]

My guess is that all of this depends on the skill level of the person you are trying to arrest. And the height of that person.

Demos where your partner knows where to resist is not proof of failure for a technique. I can make any technique work. I'll tell you that I'm going to lock your arm. So you resist the lock. I punch you in your face. I have proven that the punch works.

I tell you that I'm going to punch your face 3 times then I kick you instead, then I've shown that the kick works. If I want to lock the arm then I need to get my opponent to commit defenses away from what I really want. BJJ does this all the time to make their opponent straighten their arms.

This is where these techniques work. Somethings you can brute force but most cannot. Take downs in general work when the person is expecting something else. Most things work like that.

 

[drop bear]

My guess is that all of this depends on the skill level of the person you are trying to arrest. And the height of that person.

Demos where your partner knows where to resist is not proof of failure for a technique. I can make any technique work. I'll tell you that I'm going to lock your arm. So you resist the lock. I punch you in your face. I have proven that the punch works.

I tell you that I'm going to punch your face 3 times then I kick you instead, then I've shown that the kick works. If I want to lock the arm then I need to get my opponent to commit defenses away from what I really want. BJJ does this all the time to make their opponent straighten their arms.

This is where these techniques work. Somethings you can brute force but most cannot. Take downs in general work when the person is expecting something else. Most things work like that.

The back is an advantageous position though. So you already have that automatic step towards success. Regardless of other factors.

 

[O'Malley]

Cool takedown, wrestling is effective, as often.

Maybe arm locks can be useful if for some reason you can't afford to let go of the guy's arm (e.g. weapons?). And here perhaps I can help.

I see three fundamental problems with the guy's arm lock in the video. First, he's too much in front of his partner, which makes the technique difficult as he can't use as much bodyweight. It also exposes him to being punched, as you found out. Second, he's entering a strength contest where he tries to force his leverage on the elbow joint against his partner's resistance. Third, nothing prevents his partner from repositioning, making him lose the lock and the advantage.

In my aikido training, I've often run into the same problems as I was learning a standing armbar called ude kime nage. We don't train with full resistance but we're not floppy, and if your partner is even a little bit strong it will never work as shown in the video. To solve the three problems above, you have to 1) enter deeply so you have better leverage and are out of punching range; 2) using your whole body, spiral around the arm to extend it without going force-on-force on the elbow joint; and 3) trap the elbow joint between your and your partner's bodyweights, using gravity to prevent him from moving away from the lock (he would need to move up to get out). Once you have him in the lock, you can throw him.

If you need to bring them face down (e.g. to disarm or handcuff them) ikkyo is also an option. Once again, you don't go force-on-force but you use your bodyweight to spiral around the arm, which allows you to take your partner's balance through their shoulder. Then you bring them down.

Pro tip: did you see at 1:23 how Saito does not move forward or down, but he moves the arm towards the shoulder? That's because strong people may be able to resist, so you first use the arm like a stick to move them off base and bring their knees to the ground.

These concepts have been around for centuries in traditional Japanese jujutsu and are still being used in competitive sumo.

 

[drop bear]

Cool takedown, wrestling is effective, as often.

Maybe arm locks can be useful if for some reason you can't afford to let go of the guy's arm (e.g. weapons?). And here perhaps I can help.

I see three fundamental problems with the guy's arm lock in the video. First, he's too much in front of his partner, which makes the technique difficult as he can't use as much bodyweight. It also exposes him to being punched, as you found out. Second, he's entering a strength contest where he tries to force his leverage on the elbow joint against his partner's resistance. Third, nothing prevents his partner from repositioning, making him lose the lock and the advantage.

In my aikido training, I've often run into the same problems as I was learning a standing armbar called ude kime nage. We don't train with full resistance but we're not floppy, and if your partner is even a little bit strong it will never work as shown in the video. To solve the three problems above, you have to 1) enter deeply so you have better leverage and are out of punching range; 2) using your whole body, spiral around the arm to extend it without going force-on-force on the elbow joint; and 3) trap the elbow joint between your and your partner's bodyweights, using gravity to prevent him from moving away from the lock (he would need to move up to get out). Once you have him in the lock, you can throw him.

If you need to bring them face down (e.g. to disarm or handcuff them) ikkyo is also an option. Once again, you don't go force-on-force but you use your bodyweight to spiral around the arm, which allows you to take your partner's balance through their shoulder. Then you bring them down.

Pro tip: did you see at 1:23 how Saito does not move forward or down, but he moves the arm towards the shoulder? That's because strong people may be able to resist, so you first use the arm like a stick to move them off base and bring their knees to the ground.

These concepts have been around for centuries in traditional Japanese jujutsu and are still being used in competitive sumo.

It's a not a great move in general. A lot can go wrong. And it can go wrong either way. So it quite often just doesn't work. And they can turn and face you. Which puts you in a lot of danger.

Or it works too well and you bounce their head of the ground or mess their arm up.

People get taught it because it ticks a bunch of boxes. But don't factor in it doesn't work very well. Which is standard for a lot of police defensive stuff.

This is a good example.

It isn’t that hard to sit someone down using a back take of some sort. W
Especially in hand cuffs.

 

[drop bear]

For arm takedowns the two on one russian has better mechanical advantage. You are gripping with a stronger mechanism and you are using your whole body. And you can bail out to a safer position.

B7t you can get punched in the face pretty easily.

 

[O'Malley]

Yeah, although I like having that option (and as part of my art I have to train it properly), I can't disagree with you.

Ironically, the standing armlock from your original video was perhaps the first martial arts technique I've ever learnt and, although I have better tools now, it was the first one I've ever used to fend off bullies.

It's a not a great move in general. A lot can go wrong. And it can go wrong either way. So it quite often just doesn't work. And they can turn and face you. Which puts you in a lot of danger.

Or it works too well and you bounce their head of the ground or mess their arm up.

People get taught it because it ticks a bunch of boxes. But don't factor in it doesn't work very well. Which is standard for a lot of police defensive stuff.

This is a good example.

It isn’t that hard to sit someone down using a back take of some sort. W
Especially in hand cuffs.

 

[drop bear]

Yeah, although I like having that option (and as part of my art I have to train it properly), I can't disagree with you.

Ironically, the standing armlock from your original video was perhaps the first martial arts technique I've ever learnt and, although I have better tools now, it was the first one I've ever used to fend off bullies.

I used the hammer lock a bit. Which is basically the same thing. They need to be very unstructured for it to work.

Otherwise the other problem solve for police when the arm bar fails is to try some sort of whizzer or sweep.

Which of course generally ends very badly.

 

[O'Malley]

Badly as in "uh oh, the sweep didn't work and now I'm the one on one foot"?

I used the hammer lock a bit. Which is basically the same thing. They need to be very unstructured for it to work.

Otherwise the other problem solve for police when the arm bar fails is to try some sort of whizzer or sweep.

Which of course generally ends very badly.

 

[drop bear]

Badly as in "uh oh, the sweep didn't work and now I'm the one on one foot"?

Badly as in you start tearing knees or face planting the guy.

 

[Jared Traveler]

I think drop bear, you have to consider the benefits of attempting the straight arm bar takedown. Far better situational awareness, super quick when it works (quicker than other options), good weapons security, options to prevent being punched, plenty of follow up options if it doesn't work.

You have to recognize that it works efficiently all of the time, regardless if it should or shouldn't.

Also and this is a big, big deal, a lot of people that need controlled you don't want to get close to. Why? Blood, spit, biting. You just don't want to wrap up with someone if you can help it.

 

[Jared Traveler]

I don't disagree with the majority of your points drop bear. And I don't really like the straight arm bar on paper either. But there are a lot of hidden benefits and the fact that I don't like it much myself, I found myself using it effectively over and over again.

 

[drop bear]

I don't disagree with the majority of your points drop bear. And I don't really like the straight arm bar on paper either. But there are a lot of hidden benefits and the fact that I don't like it much myself, I found myself using it effectively over and over again.

Yeah. It just doesn't really work if someone is fighting back. Which is an issue.

I saw police use it effectively. But people are afraid that if it doesn't work they will get shot maced or tazed. So suprise. A whole bunch of stuff works in that scenario.

Remove that threat and the success rate plummets dramatically.

 

[Jared Traveler]

Yeah. It just doesn't really work if someone is fighting back. Which is an issue.

I saw police use it effectively. But people are afraid that if it doesn't work they will get shot maced or tazed. So suprise. A whole bunch of stuff works in that scenario.

Remove that threat and the success rate plummets dramatically.

That's the whole point, it is effective against a certain (common) level of resistance. It works great in context, and not so we'll out of context. Like most everything.

 

[drop bear]

That's the whole point, it is effective against a certain (common) level of resistance. It works great in context, and not so we'll out of context. Like most everything.

Not like most everything.

High percentage takedowns work in that specific context. But the also work in other contexts.

That is the appeal of high percentage takedowns.

 

[Jared Traveler]

Not like most everything.

High percentage takedowns work in that specific context. But the also work in other contexts.

That is the appeal of high percentage takedowns.

There are nuances you are not understanding. Some of which I highlighted. I want to be against the straight arm bar also, but I have used it far to many times to great effect. And in hindsight would choose it again in many circumstances.

 

[wab25]

Can someone explain why this is an either or thing? Either I can learn and use the arm bar or I can learn the takedown...

Why not learn both? Both have been successfully used. The situation will be different each time, so use the tool needed for that situation.

I personally don't like the format of the video in the OP. Guy wants to show his takedown and how it works for police work... great, lets see it. But he starts off by doing a bad version of a different technique, to prove that it does not work. Well, of course it does not work, when you do it wrong... and when the point is to show that it doesn't work.... Just show the technique that you want to show.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Can someone explain why this is an either or thing? Either I can learn and use the arm bar or I can learn the takedown...

Why not learn both? Both have been successfully used. The situation will be different each time, so use the tool needed for that situation.

I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 takedowns once. I fear the man who has practiced 1 takedown 10,000 times.

It's iffy if I'll fear you if you spent any of those times practicing options to set it up and not the takedown in a vacuum. Might mean you're not dedicated enough.

 

[drop bear]

Can someone explain why this is an either or thing? Either I can learn and use the arm bar or I can learn the takedown...

Why not learn both? Both have been successfully used. The situation will be different each time, so use the tool needed for that situation.

I personally don't like the format of the video in the OP. Guy wants to show his takedown and how it works for police work... great, lets see it. But he starts off by doing a bad version of a different technique, to prove that it does not work. Well, of course it does not work, when you do it wrong... and when the point is to show that it doesn't work.... Just show the technique that you want to show.

I subscribe to the importance of being conservative in a street fight where if you mess up it can go very badly. So I don't like techniques that only kind of work. And failing means you are generally in a worse off position.

The arm bar is taught because it is easily taught. Not because it really works very well. Which is honestly a bit of a crapway to prepare people to defend against violence.

The other issue is that to problem solve a takedown that doesn't work. The answer is to escalate. So if the arm bar doesn't work. The guy is considered a super man and you proceed to kick his head in.

Which is also easy to teach and also a bit crap.

And basically you winf up with this.

 

[wab25]

I subscribe to the importance of being conservative in a street fight where if you mess up it can go very badly. So I don't like techniques that only kind of work. And failing means you are generally in a worse off position.

The arm bar is taught because it is easily taught. Not because it really works very well. Which is honestly a bit of a crapway to prepare people to defend against violence

So we discount the many examples of law enforcement successfully using the arm bar as anecdotal....? Why are the anecdotal examples of this takedown better than the ones for the arm bar?

If the arm bar is done correctly, it puts you behind the guy, with his head down.... If you go for this the right way, if the guy is able to pull out of it, you can easily transition into this takedown or another similar type takedown. You would only be in a bad position, if you freeze in place when things go sideways... but thats true for any technique.