Bar-Brawl Evangelism. Come Join In...

[MJS]

Originally posted by Dark:

7starmatis, if I may interject for a minute, but are you serious? No amount of training, even the full-contact training as Odin suggested is comparable to the real world. And allot of the fights you will incounter in the real world won't be from experienced street fighters, bikers or hard-core criminal types but the average joe.

I think I agree with you to a point with this. I'd have to say and somewhere along the lines, I believe 7star said the same thing..IMO, alot of it is going to come down to how one gears their training. Now, going on what you said, if the majority of fights will not be from experienced people, but instead the average Joe, what makes you think that that training won' be effective?

But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.

So you're saying that unless we're taken under the wings of a biker, all of our training is useless? Sorry, I have to disagree with that.

There are no rules to the fight, but there are "codes of conduct" among thugs, bullies, and criminals that will come into play adding up to that point.

I'm far from a thug, bully or criminal and I certainly don't hang around with the like, so I'd have to say that I personally share nothing in common with these people.

I almost get the impression that you're idolizing bikers, criminals, etc., and walk around on a daily basis looking for or hoping that you'll have a confrontation, so as to prove something. No offense meant, but this is the impression that I get from reading many of your posts. If that is the case, IMHO, I think that you've missed a great deal about what the arts are all about.

Mike

 

[7starmantis]

To your second point: I say what's the difference really? A fight is a fight! If I'm boucing say and get into, after trying to talk a way out of it, and eventually a knife, bottle, etc.. comes into play.. What is different between me and a citizen in the same cirumstance? If I, or anyone is defending themselves, It's the same for everyone..PERIOD!

Well, no there is a whole different issue to pure self defense and fighting from a professional intent. There are differences in agenda, intent, legal restrictions, surroundings, understanding, and core reason for fighting. I agree to a point that the actually fighting of a person may hold some same characteristics in these two scenarios, but its not the same. As a bouncer getting into an altercation your intent is different and your willingly placing yourself in that situation. Also your intent is not to disable the customer or kill him, but simply de-esculate the issue and get them outside or to police custody. If you can't see the difference in pure self defense or "bar brawling" and the actions of professional bouncers I dont know what else to discuss. Now, I think I understand your point, being that a bouncer has a chance to really try out some of their techniques and skills on roudy patrons, but beyond that I disagree with it being the same. As a side note, I get to practice everything and way more on my training parterns than I ever could have legally or morally when I worked as a bouncer.

Your third reponse. The thread was talking about Bar Brawling. You brought the "have you killed" question. Totally different topic. What I do and have done was not addressed to the killing issue. I answered that in the first sentence. It addressed dry runs (training) and Self defense/fighting.

Ok, along the progression of this thread we got into self defense. Thats where the killing issue has merit. If your talking about simply getting into "semi friendly" brawls for fun, we aren't discussing the same thing. I have said this several times in my last several posts. But, since you are addressing self defense fighting, the killing issue must be present. You can't seperate the intent of attackers to speak of "only self defense that wouldn't have ended in death". You can't know that or seperate it that way. There have been many deaths I have seen with my own eyes that were the product of "friendly bar brawling" that either got out of hand or caused an unforseen "accident". You can call training "dry runs" all you like, but the experience of an unwilling attacker is experience none the less....regardless of the intent of the attacker, place of attack, or friendship between persons. Learning to setup techniques in various scenarios with unwilling attackers who are actually trying to at the very least knock you out or choke you out is experience. I formally invite anyone who doesn't think so to come train with me and my training partners. It's an eye opener to many who think training is static, boring, and useless.

Lastly. Yes!!!! You can pick ou those who are or not threats. You seem to divide definitions in your arguments. Aren't those that can fight, are trained, or have intent truly the big bad wolves? You better believe they are! They are the threats if they are in a negative state of mind! That aside, I and many others, even you, have done, or do it. It has nothing to do with training either. I know that's really hard for you to swallow. But, you can't teach it, No formulas etc.. You only gain it through REAL EXPERIENCES, over time. You're right about it being a dangerous game though. It's more dangerous, no matter where you're at, NOT to be able to notice the "players". If you're wrong on an assumption and they are not a big bad wolf, fine! They'll be less of a threat and problem. It's a failure to notice and recognize that gets you into trouble! I would think that someone like you who claims to have....."street cred" coming from "those" areas would know better than to make those statements. I guarantee, if you really did do, what you say you did, you did exactly what you say you can't, constantly. After all, Isn't AWARENESS the goal?

Ok, lets be clear about what I actually said. I said you can pick out people who are threats, but you simply cannot be sure. Also, you cannot pick out who is not a threat as again you have no wya of actually knowing. You can use your "training" (uh oh) to determine who you think carries the most or least threat, but to act solely upon thos assumptions is stupid in my opinion. I'm not ruling anyone out in self defense. You start acting upon your own assumptions and you start not only being wrong but having to accept the consequences of being wrong. In a pure self defense situation you may not get a second chance to be right or wrong. You simply cannot judge intent by looking. Some people you can, some you cannot....how do you decide who is which type of person? See this is a dangerously slippery slope to start basing actions on.

I never said it wasn't good practice to learn to spot potential problems but to put your confidence in these "educated guesses" is not smart. Your right, if you are wrong and they are not a threat, big deal. But take the other side of that issue, if your wrong and they are a threat........ Thats why I'm saying not to live on your assumptions, never rule anyone out based on your amazing wolf spotting skills. Its not a faliure to recognize that gets you in trouble all the time. Thast what I've been saying, your addressing this from a drunken fight because you looked at his girlfriend. I'm talking about being attacked in a real self defense situation that has passed all these preliminary escapes.

I have never claimed "cred" of any kind. And I'm not sure what statements I've made that you think I should know better than. Lets not get too personal here, you really have no idea about me or my experiences. I never said you couldn't spot potential problem people, but you can't rely on that unreliable observation. You cannot be accurate past a guess on who is or is not a problem in everyday life where self defense happens. Once again, your talking about a situation where there are alot of people around, drinking, hormones, etc. That is a different situation than true life or death self defense from being attacked. You simply cannot walk down the streets of any major city and pick out the people who would attack you and the people who would not attack you and have any resemblence of accuracy....fact. You also cannot do the above scenario and pick out who would be more likely to "win" if attacking you than who you could "win" against. The pure realism of it is you cannot see concealed weapons (hence the name concealed), malicous intent, or simple decisions to attack. To believe you can is what I consider unrealistic training and confidence.


The bottom line is your talking about experience as some sort of physical skill and it isn't. Its a mental tool used as a part in the whole of self defense. Until I see these "big bad wolfs", "thugs" and "criminals" passing me in the 105 degree Texas heat on my 5 mile running routine including sprints and bodyweight training....I'm going to continue training. Seems your forgetting different parts of training and the benefits of it. If I have to outrun an attacker to survive, I'm pretty sure I could. If I couldn't I'll have to resort to my fighting skills I've learned over the many years. I may still loose, but I'm going to do my best with the combined skill and knowledge I have gained from training and experience in true self defense situations. I dont need to be attacked to see the benefit of my training. I fight for longer than any "streetfight" I have ever witnessed or heard of....but I guess thats useless against someone who just goes out and picks fights.

7sm

 

[Hand Sword]

Well, NO, there is not! At work, the street, or anywhere the agenda is the same for you, which is no violence. The legal restrictions? They apply to everyone, EVERYWHERE, at all times. Surroundings, in terms of what is happening (you being attacked!) is irrelevant( I know they in the BIG picture. I'm talking on the small moment here) The point is you are being attacked and you have to deal with it. (this addresses the understanding issue as well). The core reason for fighting? Again, to defend yourself. It applies anytime you have to do so, ANYWHERE.

As far as willingly placing yourself in that situation... in either of your scenarios, You have no choice but to act. The attackers decided that there was going to be an issue, so they do it willingly, not you. My intent, in a bar brawl or fight, or sd situation is ALWAYS the same. I WILL disable someone. (as a bouncer you have to do so too, to de-escalate, or, get them outside, once a fight has occurred, don't you?)

To your second opinion, To me, there is no "semi friendly" brawling. a fight with friends is totally different, but that's not what this thread implied or talked about. (nor was I) To the rest of it We agree! (by the way, death can occur during friends fighting too!)

Lastly. Training has very little to do with recognizing peiople who are threats. (and I never claimed it was a physical thing) It comes through time and EXPERIENCING in the real world, with real people, and situations. It can be done, even with the criteria you brought up. People, including you do it and have done it.
Training hardly ever comes close to what happens and can never cover all of the bases. Training occurs in a dojo, or whatever. It's agreed upon by the participants, both mentally, and physically, no matter what. The conditions are controlled and familiar. In the real world this is not so! The conditions change constantly, and, unlike training, you will be caught cold, or at best semi prepared. THEY will decide where, when and how, not you. (like you do in training)
Also, as far as judging, there is only one way one should view or decide initially. That they are a threat. There is no other side of the coin view.

I am not trying to get personal with you. If you are taking it that way, I'm sorry. We just have differing philosophies about things overall, but I think we agreed with each other's original points, didn't we?

Again I agree with traing, it's all most have, and it does prepare you, we agree on that. All I said was that it's only part of the picture, ultimately, and it can't stand alone FOR SURE, when it comes to the real stuff!

 

[7starmantis]

Well, NO, there is not! At work, the street, or anywhere the agenda is the same for you, which is no violence. The legal restrictions? They apply to everyone, EVERYWHERE, at all times. Surroundings, in terms of what is happening (you being attacked!) is irrelevant( I know they in the BIG picture. I'm talking on the small moment here) The point is you are being attacked and you have to deal with it. (this addresses the understanding issue as well). The core reason for fighting? Again, to defend yourself. It applies anytime you have to do so, ANYWHERE.

I'm trying to avoid a yes, no back and forth arguemnt so I'll try to lay out my point more clearly. While the basic agenda may be to keep yourself safe, the scenarios are much different. As far as legal issue, your incorrect, they are different according to your given situations. As a citizen attacked who can reasonably assume they are in fear for their life can legally bring into play lethal force. This means seriously injuring or killing the attacker (just like the legality of pulling a concealed handgun). A professional bouncer is not under the same legal standing as you willingly introduced yourself into the frey. You can't simply walk up to the person being rowdy and shoot them in the chest, thats manslaughter. As a bouncer you are there to keep order and thus legally undertake the danger of said job. In the setting of a rowdy patron or bar brawl you would be very hard pressed to prove lethal intent enough to justify lethal force such as crushing a windpipe, gouging eyes, damage to the spine or neck, even breaking bones and especially killing a person. You brought into the picture LEOs. Ask a couple about their legal restrictions. They can't see a fight and just start shooting people. There is a scale of force that must be followed and escalated in the case of these professional that is not present or atleast not as strict in the case of a citizen being attacked. These legal restrictions vary from state to state, but in my state as a citizen I can apply lethal force to a person trying to steal my TV, you think that is a justifiable response for a LEO?

I say all of this not to detract the thread from its original topic, but to show the reasoning behind my seperation of "real fighting" from that of a security personel to a citizen being attacked. There is a difference both morally and legally. I simply address self defense from the idea of being attacked, the other scenario (professional security personel) is not self defense but rather situational de-escalation procedures which could involve phsyical defense technqiues. The intent and purpose are differnet in these two scenarios.

As far as willingly placing yourself in that situation... in either of your scenarios, You have no choice but to act. The attackers decided that there was going to be an issue, so they do it willingly, not you. My intent, in a bar brawl or fight, or sd situation is ALWAYS the same. I WILL disable someone. (as a bouncer you have to do so too, to de-escalate, or, get them outside, once a fight has occurred, don't you?)

First off, No you do not have to as a bouncer. See my first response about the legalities of disabling a person as a bouncer. As a bouncer you have "willingly placed yourself in that situation" by working as a bouncer. I'm not saying your there t ofight, but the basis of your job is to keep order by physical means if neccessary. That does not place you in teh same boat as a citizen being attacked. You say the surroundigns dont matter but they do. Proving the legality of lethal force in a bar known for fights, with a patron who has had a drink or two where you might have had a drink or tow yourself is going to be much different than proving the legality of lethal force in a situation where your attacked with your wife/girlfriend in a park. This applies to legal issues as well as the level of intent and force. Now, dont get me wrong, anyone who reads my posts knows I am not in favor of fighting "less" or "lighter" in one situation versus the next, but there is a sliding scale of reasonable force that must be adheared to both morally and legally. If your saying you have to disable a person as a bouncer to get them outside that either means (to me) that you are not a bouncer, or are not a bouncer in the type of place that gets this type of attention. Or you just haven't had the proper training of acceptable force.

To your second opinion, To me, there is no "semi friendly" brawling. a fight with friends is totally different, but that's not what this thread implied or talked about. (nor was I) To the rest of it We agree! (by the way, death can occur during friends fighting too!)

I agree, death can occur in many situations, like what I said in my post. What I meant by "semi friendly bar fighting" was the type of fight over one guy looking at his girlfriend, or the drunken bravado chest bumping type stuff. That is not a situation to pull out your concealed handgun and start blasting away (especially if your carrying your gun in a bar). I'm simply not going to fight a drunken patron at a bar. I'll get up, walk away, leave, go find a bouncer, etc. Until the person puts their hands on me, I'm not doing a thing in that situation (in most cases there are always exceptions).

Lastly. Training has very little to do with recognizing peiople who are threats. (and I never claimed it was a physical thing) It comes through time and EXPERIENCING in the real world, with real people, and situations. It can be done, even with the criteria you brought up. People, including you do it and have done it.

I'll agree to a point here. You can be trained to recognize these types of things just as I took classes to recognize when a person was lying. It does take experiecne to really get good at it, but your training is what allows the experience to mean anything. I never claimed I dotn do it, what I said was that recognizing a potential threat is only one little piece of the puzzle. There are situations where your wife your wife or young child maybe, where you can recognize a potential threat but even if their intent is made known and they are approaching you to attack you, this "experience" you are talking about has played its role and is now useless. The situation has escalated past that level and now if you have no physical training, your in trouble. Dont make the mistake of boxing all training into one type. There are many different methods of training and avenues to train. there is the technique side, the phsyical conditioning, cardio, mental, bag rooms, etc. These all play a huge role in your success in self defense situations.

Training hardly ever comes close to what happens and can never cover all of the bases. Training occurs in a dojo, or whatever. It's agreed upon by the participants, both mentally, and physically, no matter what. The conditions are controlled and familiar. In the real world this is not so! The conditions change constantly, and, unlike training, you will be caught cold, or at best semi prepared. THEY will decide where, when and how, not you. (like you do in training)
Also, as far as judging, there is only one way one should view or decide initially. That they are a threat. There is no other side of the coin view.

I disagree. Your speaking of a certain type or method of training. Never covering all the basis is true, but that goes for experience as well. You will never be able to cover every angle. In fact, that is why in training you attempt to train areas that adapt to different situations. For instance, training your cardio and getting in a bag room isn't situationally valuable, it relates to any situation....this type of thing can be done in actual technique type training as well. We also train in conditions that are not controlled, familiar, etc. I think its a misconception to think the conditions really affect the base of your physical reactions and skills. If you train to react in a variety of situations and train to have a mental awareness and "readyness" then I dont think the conditions will haev as much affect as your making it sound. Your training should be in suhc a way to attempt to keep you from being caught cold. This is the "experience" you have been talking about coming into play. Is there ever the possibility of covering 100% of the situations...no, but you can train your body in such a way that it can adapt to different situations and conditions. That is why your trianing should be alive and changeing, not static and stale.

As far as judging, if you truly believe what your saying about only seeing a threat, then why do you place so much importance on the experience of recognizing potential threats? You should allready be viewing everyone as a threat, no? If you view everyone as a possible threat, you dont have to worry about if your right or wrong, everyone is a threat and thus you prepared at all times.

Again I agree with traing, it's all most have, and it does prepare you, we agree on that. All I said was that it's only part of the picture, ultimately, and it can't stand alone FOR SURE, when it comes to the real stuff!

I guess we do need to agree to disagree, because I believe if done correctly and realistically, your training can "stand alone" as far as preparing you to deal with self defense situations. Is it all it takes to be a great and respected streetfighter? Probably not, but then again that is very different from self defense isn't it.

Bottom line:
This is all about confidence or ego. Does bar brawling make your skills valid? Were they not valid before the bar brawl? Isn't it just to make you believe they are valid that you would need to test them? If what you train actually works did it have some lesser value before you catually used it on a "big bad wolf"? Was it not just a effective before that encounter as it is after? What is different about my training partner throwing a punch to my head trying to knock me out and a drunken custoemr at a bar throwing the same punch? Once it turns physical, yoru training is all that you have...experience is great, but doesn't give you any higher chance of curvival than "mere" training does.

7sm

 

[painstain]

reading back on all this i must say i regret replying at all. i was reading it all and going through everyones points (you all have great points) but i started to wonder what would the masters say, or the grand masters. they would say just train.

so if i could i would withdraw all my posts and say.... just train.

with respect,
painstain

 

[Dark]

I'm far from a thug, bully or criminal and I certainly don't hang around with the like, so I'd have to say that I personally share nothing in common with these people.

I almost get the impression that you're idolizing bikers, criminals, etc., and walk around on a daily basis looking for or hoping that you'll have a confrontation, so as to prove something. No offense meant, but this is the impression that I get from reading many of your posts. If that is the case, IMHO, I think that you've missed a great deal about what the arts are all about.

Mike

No but I won't send a point fighter in TKD on to a wrestling mat. Same thing, unless you know the rules of the game, you can't effectively play it. Simply put; you train the way you fight, if you train for the so called "streets" you will be prepared for the "streets." (Provided you aren't being fed a bunch of BS).

I won't send a point fighter into a muay thai ring or a ballet dancer to the octagon, MA training Vs Street Effectiveness is the same deal.

 

[MJS]

No but I won't send a point fighter in TKD on to a wrestling mat. Same thing, unless you know the rules of the game, you can't effectively play it. Simply put; you train the way you fight, if you train for the so called "streets" you will be prepared for the "streets." (Provided you aren't being fed a bunch of BS).

I won't send a point fighter into a muay thai ring or a ballet dancer to the octagon, MA training Vs Street Effectiveness is the same deal.

Not sure, but are you addressing this quote:

But unless your sensei/sifu is an ex-biker, or street fighter you might not learn anything about real fighting situations.

with the above reply? If thats the case, then I guess you're saying that pretty much everyone out there that trains might as well stop, because they're wasting their time unless they're training with an ex con. Sorry, again I have to disagree. I get some quality training, which is very 'alive' with the people I train with and they're not ex cons.

Mike

 

[Dark]

with the above reply? If thats the case, then I guess you're saying that pretty much everyone out there that trains might as well stop, because they're wasting their time unless they're training with an ex con. Sorry, again I have to disagree. I get some quality training, which is very 'alive' with the people I train with and they're not ex cons.

Mike

That was the quote Mike, I'm not saying that the training is worthless. I'm saying you are attempting to compare apples to oranges. If you want to "street fight" you have to train with "street fighters" just like if you want to learn karate you must train with karateka.

If you are looking at raw self-defense the same applies in context, you could learn with a former LEO who can impart knowledge from experience. In a purely accademic context training in any MA teaches you good skills and effective techniques. In the context of the average joe, this guy has most likely been in a few scarps and knows how to fight. Thats not going to make him Joe Frazier, but he will know how to handle himself.

The worst case senario is these "street fighter types" who are infact very criminal minded and mentally ill, a karate cass or MMA class isn't going to teach you to deal with them. I made the mistake in only bringing up bikers and x-street fighters you can also pick up the same knowledge from former LEOs who have some experience under their belts.

The point is the same no purely academic MA or SD program will work in the real world. You can say its "alive" or whatever catch phrase you want, unless its "living" in the enviroment you will apply it in, it is insufficent. If we can't agree on that then we can agree to disagree...

 

[Dark]

There are so many assumptions and niave descriptions in this thread, I dont know where to start. First, you simply cannot assume you are right, ever.

Just as you should never assume I'm wrong I personally take everything I'm told with a grain of salt and I fully expect others to do the same to me. Otherwise they are sheep and not men, but thats a personal outlook on life.

[SIZE=-1][/SIZE][SIZE=-1]

[/SIZE]

This is the mentality difference I was refering to. As an adult I'm not going to fight you unless I think my life or wellbeing is in danger (or that of my wife or family). Your mentality is that of a fighter who fights to win to prove something, be seen, or prove legitimacy.

That is the mentality of 90% of the joes you'll face on the street. They will fight you to prove something, and kill you for anything more then that.

I'm talking about fighting to stop yourself from being killed. I know the limits that apply, thats why I carry my concealed handgun. I know the limits that apply there and what I can and cannot do with lethal force, thats why I make the points I make. Mentally, I'm fighting for my life everytime...I am not responsible for nor will I hesitate to determine the attackers intent. If I feel threatened I will react, big bad wolf or not. We are simply discussing differnt things intent wise. No big deal, we just have to realize that and agree to disagree.

I'm going for why they are going at you ad not how. How is easy, in whatever way you won't see it coming but why determines the lengths they will go to.

First, I'm not a thug, bully, or criminal, so we share no code or rule. I've come a long way in my life from where I started, I'm not going to let anyone take that from me. Its naive to determine or base your action on the supposed "code of conduct" of a criminal. Again though, I'm talking about pure self defense, not measuring up who the best fighter is and taking on only those less skilled than him. I'm not "taking on anyone" I'm going to defend whomever attempts to "take on" me.

In my book your not even talking realistically, here is the deal criminal minded individuals have the same basic social codes as everyone else. The difference is they are the judge and jury as whether you've crossed that line and sole executioner of the punishment they think you have earned. You can't take on whomever because in most cases whomever will just shoot you from the shadows and be gone.

while what you are saying here about spotting people carrying may be true in some cases it is not true across the board and has no set percentage of correctness on which to base your beliefs or actions. I've lived around several gangs both american and russian and I see huge mistakes in your categorization of their body language.

True cultural difference and even the way people where raised comes can change the general make up of a person's body language, as does the variency from individual to individual. But the basic hints are all the same.

While it may hold true in some cases, it is not accurate enough to base your actions on.

Its the perfect reason to base my actions on, my thoughts, my gut feelings and picking up on certain body language hints have allowed me to dodge trouble and if needed I'll justify me actions the same way I always do, my actions and my consiquences good or bad its all my fault.

Actually no these "rookies" have been through extensive training before ever setting foot on the "beat". Oh, and your fantastical notion of "knowing when to break the book" is not condusive to good LEOs.

Now in my personal opinion, you are completely off here. A rookie still goes out with the older more experienced officers to learn the ropes and that extensive training isn't worth paper the certificates are printed on. The reason being is because like military training they don't consider the whole of training effective until there is some experience under their belt.

Most cops who are kill in the line of duty are rookies, and they are killed because that training and not experience is what they rely on. Most innocent people shot by cops are shot by rookies, why because the rookies are too "wet behind the ears" to be used to exercising constant control.

Experience in high stress situations leads to control in high stress situations.

So can you learn it in training or not? That is the crux of our disagreement. You are contradicting yourself.

Training is a start, but it doesn't mean anything without experience. Experiences are realitive to the context of the experience. Experience in a dojo and experience in a bar room brawl is completely different.

Your still talking about streetfighting while I'm refering to life or death self defense. So now we agree that training can prepare you for these "worst case scenarios"? I'm confused, you disagreed earlier, and now you agree?

Streetfighting is life or death, its about who wins and it doesn't matter how. I asked my old Shotokan instructor to teach me to street fight, he took me to red neck bar and got me drunk then told some guys there I said some stuff and then me told me they said some stuff. And got all caught up in a fight, I woke in the ER.

That was my first lesson, trust no one especially your friends. Thats the kinda life most street fighters come from and unless your training mimics that life style then no it doesn't prepare you for anything. Remember that word "context" what context is your training? Like I said in an earlier post, your art can be "alive" but unless its living in the enviroment you will be applying it then it is insufficent. Insufficent means its lacking, not completely useless...


[

Just dont ever get comfortable and substitute realism for fantasy...thats the dangerous part. Its hard to keep your training as realistic as possible....try your best.

7sm

I think we can both agree here

 

[MJS]

That was the quote Mike, I'm not saying that the training is worthless. I'm saying you are attempting to compare apples to oranges. If you want to "street fight" you have to train with "street fighters" just like if you want to learn karate you must train with karateka.

If you are looking at raw self-defense the same applies in context, you could learn with a former LEO who can impart knowledge from experience. In a purely accademic context training in any MA teaches you good skills and effective techniques. In the context of the average joe, this guy has most likely been in a few scarps and knows how to fight. Thats not going to make him Joe Frazier, but he will know how to handle himself.

The worst case senario is these "street fighter types" who are infact very criminal minded and mentally ill, a karate cass or MMA class isn't going to teach you to deal with them. I made the mistake in only bringing up bikers and x-street fighters you can also pick up the same knowledge from former LEOs who have some experience under their belts.

The point is the same no purely academic MA or SD program will work in the real world. You can say its "alive" or whatever catch phrase you want, unless its "living" in the enviroment you will apply it in, it is insufficent. If we can't agree on that then we can agree to disagree...

Hmm...so you're basing everyones effectiveness on if they're training with a streetfighter? Well, as I've said countless times in the past Ron, unless you've seen how everyone in the world trains, those comments hold no weight. How would you explain the successfull defenses of people against a real attack? Sorry, but you can't say that training with a streetfighter(Boy that word is taking a beating) is going to be the ultimate deciding factor. It all comes down to how one gears their training. Its amazing how people put punks on such a high pedestal. There must be alot of Supermen running around those "str33tz"

Mike

 

[MJS]

Streetfighting is life or death, its about who wins and it doesn't matter how. I asked my old Shotokan instructor to teach me to street fight, he took me to red neck bar and got me drunk then told some guys there I said some stuff and then me told me they said some stuff. And got all caught up in a fight, I woke in the ER.

Its been a while since I've seen the movie, but didn't that happen to Jean Claude Van Damm in the movie Kickboxer as well?

Mike

 

[Dark]

Hmm...so you're basing everyones effectiveness on if they're training with a streetfighter? Well, as I've said countless times in the past Ron, unless you've seen how everyone in the world trains, those comments hold no weight. How would you explain the successfull defenses of people against a real attack?

Don't be there, I've seen much of the world and have seen some really great martial artists. But, experience is the determining factor. In the world of most military and even LEOs there is a certain level of respect given to the combat veterians (I'm not one nor will I claim to be). As soon as the real world where MAs, SD and SF all blur its always the dojo kitties who scream my training teaches me all I need to know. Why is that?

Sorry, but you can't say that training with a streetfighter(Boy that word is taking a beating) is going to be the ultimate deciding factor. It all comes down to how one gears their training. Its amazing how people put punks on such a high pedestal. There must be alot of Supermen running around those "str33tz"

Same reason as why combat vets get all the props in Military & LEO Circles; they been there and done that. It isn't that there are supermen on streets, its that there are regular men who have toughened up to adverse conditions. It is that while most dojo kittens get to run around using terms like "warrior" and "samurai combat arts" they are all just playing the role of a tiger.

I'm not going to say MAs don't prepare you for a fight, I am going to say they don't prepare you for a life or fighting. Allot of those punks have fought growing up, fought in jail and fought in bars. Thats living in violence, something most people are all to happy to play at and not really experience.

 

[Xue Sheng]

So we get back to the same old argument that it's not a martial art unless it's viable on the street. I have kids to go home to who depend on me. So ... it's unlikely you will find me whooping it up at the local bar anyhow. Y'all have fun, now, y'hear?

And here again, we return to the argument that everyone trains in martial arts primarily for self-defense? While it is a significant reason given, I don't think there are many martial artists who walk the streets thinking, "la-aaa ti da-aahh, I'm so sa-aaafe, no one can hurt me, tum ti la la la-aaaa."

RBSD doesn't mean you have to seek a fight or brawl to prove something.

These are good points.

Is it possible that the MA training itself give you a better awareness of what’s around you? Is it possible that the training gives you a much better view of what is going on in the real world so you don't run oblivious into the street singing "I'm alright, don’t know body worry bout me" while flashing your wallet?

I tend to think that it does. It improves you overall awareness and that in and of itself is a part of real self-defense. The idea is not to fight if at all possible. The idea is not being afraid to run from a fight if at all possible. The idea is being aware of your abilities and not being concerned about ego. If you can run do so, that does not make you less of a martial artist nor does it means you are not capable. It means you are smart.

I do not necessarily feel that in order to prove your MA is real or true or good that you need to go get in a street fight. Nor do I think anyone here is advocating that one should.

And before the questions accusations and comments start to fly. I have used my MA in real life situations more than I care to remember.

EDIT – APOLOGIES.

I was reading through the post and I made an error. I am making a comment on the first page of the post when in reality I am 9 pages away.

Once again my apologies for my error and intrusion.

XS

 

[Dark]

Its been a while since I've seen the movie, but didn't that happen to Jean Claude Van Damm in the movie Kickboxer as well?

Mike

Thats where he got the idea... I didn't do as good as Van Damn I got sucker punched and went to sleep, luckiely the guy didn't kick me in the face more then a few times while I was out. I quit wanting to learn to street fight after that...

 

[MJS]

Don't be there, I've seen much of the world and have seen some really great martial artists. But, experience is the determining factor. In the world of most military and even LEOs there is a certain level of respect given to the combat veterians (I'm not one nor will I claim to be) but as soon as the real world where MAs, SD and SF all blur its always the dojo kitties who scream my training teaches me all I need to know. Why is that?

Well, I may not be a combat vet., but I too have had the chance to train with some great Martial Artists. At least this is one thing that you and I can agree on.

Same reason as why combat vets get all the props in Military & LEO Circles they been there and done that. It isn't that there are supermen on streets, its that there are regular men who have toughened up to adverse conditions, is that while most dojo kittens get to run around using terms like "warrior" and "samurai combat arts" they are all just playing the role of a tiger.

Ummm..ok

I'm not going to say MAs don't prepare you for a fight, I am going to say they don't prepare you for a life or fighting. Allot of those punks have fought growing up, fought in jail and fought in bars. Thats living in violence, something most people are all to happy to play at and not really experience.

You already have said it...many times. Personally Ron, I have better things to do in my life than walk around wishing, hoping for, looking for a fight.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Thats where he got the idea... I didn't do as good as Van Damn I got sucker punched and went to sleep, luckiely the guy didn't kick me in the face more then a few times while I was out. I quit wanting to learn to street fight after that...

Well, you didn't expect JCVD to lose did you! The star of a movie, no matter how much he seems to be taking a beating, just keeps on tickin'!!

Mike

 

[MJS]

BTW, could you please address this question.

How would you explain the successfull defenses of people against a real attack?

Thanks,

Mike

 

[Hand Sword]

Finding common ground, Is it safe to say that training and experience go hand an hand, and both need each other? (in terms of self defense)

For instance, we train the best we can, and then do. Upon doing, we experience things that threw us curveballs, that we then bring back to the "labs" and work on, then repeat the process.

Isn't how the training scenarios came and come about anyway? Formed from real scenarios?

 

[Kreth]

Just out of curiosity, how old are the participants in this thread? I'm 39.

 

[Kensai]

Dark wrote:

Don't be there, I've seen much of the world and have seen some really great martial artists. But, experience is the determining factor. In the world of most military and even LEOs there is a certain level of respect given to the combat veterians (I'm not one nor will I claim to be). As soon as the real world where MAs, SD and SF all blur its always the dojo kitties who scream my training teaches me all I need to know. Why is that?

I am, and what I learned in my "training" was more than adequate to see me through, not having been in live combat prior to it, I had no "experience" to go on. How then, does that leave the debate?

If training was bunk, why would the collective militaries of the world spend millions upon millions of dollars, pounds, euros on training? On simulators, on exercises? Why wouldn't they just take the first conflict that came along and throw in a load of rookies without any or little training? Because they'd be butchered that's why. Experience is an incredible bonus, but it is a luxury. One that I'm not willing to gain through deliberately looking for a fight. Experience and training, neither of which make you invincible. To go looking for trouble to increase your "experience of live situations" is also ridiculous. You go looking for trouble, you will find it. Supposing you don't survive? What a lesson that'd be. No wait... You'd be dead. Supposing you take the beating of your life, what's that teach you? What it's like to be beaten? You can only "experience" so much, given that almost every situation will be completely different from the last.

Train hard, fight easy. That's the motto of the Royal Navy's training arm. Be diligent, have the greatest awareness on the streets (tm). As my sifu says, "you should have eyes in the back of your head", and then asks us if we feel we've learned something at the end of every lesson. Goes round each one of us, wants to know if there's just ONE thing that we feel we've picked up. AWARENESS, AWARENESS, AWARENESS, Christ I sound like Tony Blair. Anyway, as a wiser man than me said, "to win without fighting is best", that is the true value of MA in my view, the teaching in any decently taught art to be aware of your environment, at least gives you a chance. It served me well a couple of months back. Good debate/discussion though, some valid points made by many.