Become a fighting machine

[Gerry Seymour]

I can and have applied my self defense skills in real life and these are skill sets that learn through training self defense.

I think the point is that you have applied self-defense component skills, but those skills are not self-defense. The self-defense is what happens when you defend yourself in real life. The skills were punching, kicking, blocking, etc., and that's what you learned. First you learned them simply, then you learned to apply them in wider circumstances, then you learned to apply them in more advanced ways (often, actually simpler ways), then you used them to defend yourself. That latter part is self-defense.

This would be like me going to art school to study the art of drawing. I'd learn component skills of drawing - how to draw shapes, how to use shadow and light, how to use different media, and later how to express through those techniques. At no point along the way am I actually learning art - I'm learning the component skills that allow me to create a work of art, but the art only happens when I apply those skills appropriately.

 

[drop bear]

Ah! That makes sense. And, yes, I'm not a fan of folks training with the big gloves when self-defense is an objective. MMA gloves (and even my kempo gloves, which are a bit heavier/softer) are much closer to what you'll have "on the street".

There are different things you will get out of different gloves. You can spar harder with big gloves unless you are staunch. And you are basically safer. You get a better feel for fighting if you spar with little gloves.

Every time i spar with little gloves it tends to tear my face to bits. So I am not keen to do it all the time.

So if i didnt really know the guy and wanted to introduce them to the idea of striking and grappling I would do big gloves because if you both start throwing bombs you will still probably both be able to walk out.

If you are considering self defence both factors need to be taken into account.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There are different things you will get out of different gloves. You can spar harder with big gloves unless you are staunch. And you are basicallu safer. You get a better feel for fighting if you sparr with little gloves.

Every time i spar with little gloves it tends to tear my face to bits. So I am not keen to do it all the time.

Part of the problem for us is that the big gloves completely remove much of our arsenal - no feel, and less ability to move "softly" because of that reduced feel and increased weight. Plus, no fingers. I'm trying out the kempo gloves because they have more padding than "small gloves" without so much weight and still allow finger control. I'd personally rather use the foam things than boxing gloves. I've also picked up some cheap fabric gloves (using that term very loosely now) that are very soft when used for lighter contact, though they'd be crappy at best for harder contact.

 

[drop bear]

That's a good example of the use of the hammerfist. I think you'e just pointed out somewhere I'm not leveraging some of my early teaching. I need to go back and look at where I should be reminding them of that strike in some of the later material. Thanks!

Yeah no dramas. what we do is a lot of that sort of nuance on a very basic theme. That I have not seen people do in other systems sort of.

Ok they do it. Boxing has tremendous nuance in punching. bjj has tremendous nuance in grappling. But the nuance is lost in the transtition.
That nuance in transition is going to be an increadable benifit to the self defence people who are able to take advantage of it. Because you will get this base of really slick working methodology that you can then build the rest of the system on.

 

[drop bear]

Part of the problem for us is that the big gloves completely remove much of our arsenal - no feel, and less ability to move "softly" because of that reduced feel and increased weight. Plus, no fingers. I'm trying out the kempo gloves because they have more padding than "small gloves" without so much weight and still allow finger control. I'd personally rather use the foam things than boxing gloves. I've also picked up some cheap fabric gloves (using that term very loosely now) that are very soft when used for lighter contact, though they'd be crappy at best for harder contact.

If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a dogeball.

If you can take a guy down with 16s on you are more effective if you have fingers.

or alternatively.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a dogeball.

If you can take a guy down with 16s on you are more effective if you have fingers.

or alternatively.

That picture is what I'm referring to as "kempo gloves". Not as heavy as the 16's, and reasonable access to fingers.

The problem with takedowns with the 16's is mostly one of "feel". The hands are so isolated from what's around them that we can't feel where we are, so we have to manufacture the situations for our throws/takedowns. That's contrary to our approach (and not a good use of some of our techniques). We follow the situation and use what shows up, and this requires we be able to recognize the situation, and feel is part of it.

There is one good use for heavier gloves like the 16's, though. Since feel is reduced somewhat under threat responses ("fight/flight/freeze"), working without the feel part of the time can help fill the gap between the very sensitive feel we develop (and can come to depend upon in the dojo) and the reality of reduced sense of touch. It's not nearly as dull as the 16's produce, but it makes a good training point.

 

[drop bear]

That picture is what I'm referring to as "kempo gloves". Not as heavy as the 16's, and reasonable access to fingers.

The problem with takedowns with the 16's is mostly one of "feel". The hands are so isolated from what's around them that we can't feel where we are, so we have to manufacture the situations for our throws/takedowns. That's contrary to our approach (and not a good use of some of our techniques). We follow the situation and use what shows up, and this requires we be able to recognize the situation, and feel is part of it.

There is one good use for heavier gloves like the 16's, though. Since feel is reduced somewhat under threat responses ("fight/flight/freeze"), working without the feel part of the time can help fill the gap between the very sensitive feel we develop (and can come to depend upon in the dojo) and the reality of reduced sense of touch. It's not nearly as dull as the 16's produce, but it makes a good training point.

You start really pegging into someone with 16s you will get a threat response.

Otherwise yeah fair enough.

 

[Steve]

That's it, precisely. The difference you and I are presenting about SD training is, I think, semantics. If the SD training is grounded in reasonable, effective techniques and includes some resistive training (application), then it doesn't suffer so much from not having competition involved. The programs that participate in competition have that "inherent advantage" of knowing that resistive component is built into the competition, and that someone outside the school will let them know (via a shellacking) if they aren't applying the skills well. That latter point is important. Those of us who don't use external competition have to do extra work to make sure the resistance inside the program doesn't get predictable and repetitive. One of the most valuable people in my program currently is a student with good experience in a striking art, who is actually fond of that art. His approach (and willingness to challenge ideas and concepts) helps keep me vigilant.

Up to a point, I think we're on the same page. Was thinking about this last night and want to be sure I'm speaking plainly here.

I appreciate that you make an effort to incorporate resistance inside the program that is not predictable. However, and I believe this is a point that drop bear made earlier, it's inherently artificial. If I'm working with a new supervisor on some specific leadership competencies, that person will need to apply the skills and techniques with real people and in real relationships. This is equivalent to taking jiu jitsu techniques and applying them in a competition.

In a style that has no competitive outlet, the equivalent is a manager who never manages, or a leader who never leads. It's the cadet who gets to the last day of training in West Point only to be told to repeat the final year over and over.

I would also like to highlight that the stakes of the above are not high, because the likelihood of being forced to deliver on the "self defense" skills you're learning are very low. The low crime rates are a great thing, even if it creates this dilemma where self defense experts often have little or no actual experience doing what they're teaching. This goes back to some of the posts in the other thread on what people actually need.

Do people need to know how to defend against a knife? I don't know. I've had two knives pulled on me in my life (both over 30 years ago) and in neither case would "knife defense" skills have helped me. In one case, I ran into traffic and put a metro bus in between me and the bad guy. That worked. In the other case, staying calm and being ready to run helped me. At the time of these events I had no martial arts training at all, but managed to survive both encounters.

 

[jks9199]

A couple of thoughts...

Something to think about in self defense is that the techniques have to work, even for people who aren't fit, competitive athletes, who may have been injured, and who are facing someone who is significantly larger, and significantly stronger. (We'll ignore, for the moment complications caused by ambushes.) Maybe along the lines of a lightweight fighter facing a heavyweight... A lot of techniques practiced and trained in an MMA gym work great -- against a similarly sized fighter, when used by someone who is fit and relatively uninjured. While there aren't tons of folks much stronger than me... for a woman, or even a smaller man? Yeah, lots of bigger and stronger people out there, and odds are good that someone planning violence isn't going to pick a target who might provide a "challenge." I use my wife, my sister-in-law, my niece, and my mother as a guideline when I evaluate a proposed "self defense" move. If I don't think they could reasonably pull it off -- it doesn't pass muster, without qualifications and perhaps redesigning it. That's not to say that a person in an MMA gym can't train for self defense. They just need to look at what they're doing, and make appropriate adjustments. Like I said way back at the start -- if self defense is the goal, you need to do the research and work, and figure that out.

Ambushes and the nature of a violent attack is something else to consider. Sparring, drills, even a "real" fight all has one element in common: you know when it will happen. A real violent attack? Not so much. And that goes the same way for "regular" martial arts training, too... Again -- not an insurmountable problem (no, I'm not suggesting random attacks in the gym -- just that you have to design techniques and tactics and strategies that work with that problem -- whether that jumps over the OODA Loop through conditioned responses, or that somehow lets the defender get to the good side of the action/reaction gap.

MMA has some great aspects for training for self defense. It's very openness to new approaches, to combining and mixing techniques is a tremendous asset to finding good self defense techniques. So is training with real resistance and pressure testing of the techniques. It all comes down to training for the goal in mind.

 

[Steve]

I think your logic is a little haywire, jks.

 

[KenpoMaster805]

MMA will do fine

 

[drop bear]

Something to think about in self defense is that the techniques have to work, even for people who aren't fit, competitive athletes, who may have been injured, and who are facing someone who is significantly larger, and significantly stronger.

No it doesn't. This is a misconception. It has to work in a realistic manner. If the odds are stacked against you then nothing may work.

You have to train against bigger fitter and better guys.
But your your self defence will work less and less.


That is why I like the back grab as an example as it does people's heads in. The advantage is to the guy with back control. But self defence says you can escape. So you either look like an idiot a lot of the time. Or at some point you change the rules of reality into a pleasant fiction.

 

[drop bear]

Ambushes and the nature of a violent attack is something else to consider. Sparring, drills, even a "real" fight all has one element in common: you know when it will happen. A real violent attack? Not so much. And that goes the same way for "regular" martial arts training, too... Again -- not an insurmountable problem (no, I'm not suggesting random attacks in the gym -- just that you have to design techniques and tactics and strategies that work with that problem --

We have a thread on realistic tactical considerations and nobody yet has been able to produce anything decent yet on countering an ambush.

If like me you have done close personal protection and cash in transit.(who are the guys who deal mostly with ambush attacks )Then an ambush is generally countered by good route planning. And not displaying yourself as a target.

That ronin tunnel scene i keep posting as the example.

Martial arts almost doesn't factor in.

Unless you are ambushed. At which point you will probably want to know how to fight.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No it doesn't. This is a misconception. It has to work in a realistic manner. If the odds are stacked against you then nothing may work.

You have to train against bigger fitter and better guys.
But your your self defence will work less and less.


That is why I like the back grab as an example as it does people's heads in. The advantage is to the guy with back control. But self defence says you can escape. So you either look like an idiot a lot of the time. Or at some point you change the rules of reality into a pleasant fiction.

Not sure which attack you're calling a "back grab", but pretty much anything that puts the attacker behind you is a bit of a nightmare. Rarely un-recoverable, but you have to get everything right and probably need a bit of luck.

As for the other part, there are techniques that are more/less useful against larger, more fit opponents/attackers, and there are techniques that are more/less useful by less mobile, weaker defenders. Size, strength, and fitness all matter, of course - no way to negate that entirely - but there are techniques which don't fit certain mixes, especially with less-experienced people (think relatively new students). And there are some techniques and applications to techniques which, when they are available, actually require basically no strength.

In selecting for SD use, two groups should be included (from among the stuff that works): solid basics, and stuff that can be used by weaker/less mobile defenders and/or against larger/more fit attackers. These will cover most areas, and gaps can be filled with other techniques left in the "what works" pile.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

We have a thread on realistic tactical considerations and nobody yet has been able to produce anything decent yet on countering an ambush.

If like me you have done close personal protection and cash in transit.(who are the guys who deal mostly with ambush attacks )Then an ambush is generally countered by good route planning. And not displaying yourself as a target.

That ronin tunnel scene i keep posting as the example.

Martial arts almost doesn't factor in.

Unless you are ambushed. At which point you will probably want to know how to fight.

Precisely. There are reactions we can train in that might help in that split second when the ambush happens, but it depends upon the attack. If they swing a baseball bat out of the inky shadows, aiming for your head, nothing will help except awareness. If they run up and grab (purse, briefcase, arm) then a learned reaction can save you from being tumbled, or at least help you respond quickly if you are. If the ambush is just cornering you then attacking, then the same techniques apply as with any attack ("you will probably want to know how to fight"), except that you have more limited room to work.

As you said, the best way to counter an ambush is to recognize a likely location and not go there.

 

[drop bear]

Not sure which attack you're calling a "back grab", but pretty much anything that puts the attacker behind you is a bit of a nightmare. Rarely un-recoverable, but you have to get everything right and probably need a bit of luck.

As for the other part, there are techniques that are more/less useful against larger, more fit opponents/attackers, and there are techniques that are more/less useful by less mobile, weaker defenders. Size, strength, and fitness all matter, of course - no way to negate that entirely - but there are techniques which don't fit certain mixes, especially with less-experienced people (think relatively new students). And there are some techniques and applications to techniques which, when they are available, actually require basically no strength.

In selecting for SD use, two groups should be included (from among the stuff that works): solid basics, and stuff that can be used by weaker/less mobile defenders and/or against larger/more fit attackers. These will cover most areas, and gaps can be filled with other techniques left in the "what works" pile.

Possibly happens but in General I would say that was the exception.

Would you have an example of a solid basic that should be substituted for another technique due to sise ans weight or ability.

 

[Hanzou]

A couple of thoughts...

Something to think about in self defense is that the techniques have to work, even for people who aren't fit, competitive athletes, who may have been injured, and who are facing someone who is significantly larger, and significantly stronger. (We'll ignore, for the moment complications caused by ambushes.) Maybe along the lines of a lightweight fighter facing a heavyweight... A lot of techniques practiced and trained in an MMA gym work great -- against a similarly sized fighter, when used by someone who is fit and relatively uninjured. While there aren't tons of folks much stronger than me... for a woman, or even a smaller man? Yeah, lots of bigger and stronger people out there, and odds are good that someone planning violence isn't going to pick a target who might provide a "challenge." I use my wife, my sister-in-law, my niece, and my mother as a guideline when I evaluate a proposed "self defense" move. If I don't think they could reasonably pull it off -- it doesn't pass muster, without qualifications and perhaps redesigning it. That's not to say that a person in an MMA gym can't train for self defense. They just need to look at what they're doing, and make appropriate adjustments. Like I said way back at the start -- if self defense is the goal, you need to do the research and work, and figure that out.

Ambushes and the nature of a violent attack is something else to consider. Sparring, drills, even a "real" fight all has one element in common: you know when it will happen. A real violent attack? Not so much. And that goes the same way for "regular" martial arts training, too... Again -- not an insurmountable problem (no, I'm not suggesting random attacks in the gym -- just that you have to design techniques and tactics and strategies that work with that problem -- whether that jumps over the OODA Loop through conditioned responses, or that somehow lets the defender get to the good side of the action/reaction gap.

MMA has some great aspects for training for self defense. It's very openness to new approaches, to combining and mixing techniques is a tremendous asset to finding good self defense techniques. So is training with real resistance and pressure testing of the techniques. It all comes down to training for the goal in mind.

The very fact that MMA includes Jiujitsu indicates that someone of smaller stature can use it to defend against someone larger than themselves.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Possibly happens but in General I would say that was the exception.

Would you have an example of a solid basic that should be substituted for another technique due to sise ans weight or ability.

An easy example is punch vs. elbow. They're different ranges, so not entirely interchangeable, but I always start out teaching elbows and knees. Later, most people will prefer punches (better range and speed), but at first we go for the strike that has a lower risk of self-injury (you might or might not be surprised at how badly some people naturally punch) and is easier to deliver power.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The very fact that MMA includes Jiujitsu indicates that someone of smaller stature can use it to defend against someone larger than themselves.

That aspect of MMA is definitely well-suited to dealing with a larger, stronger attacker (plenty of videos on that one). The only significant risk there is that a lighter defender loses some effective tools (bodyweight techniques don't have as much effect, especially on a strong attacker), and the most natural defense to a significant segment of BJJ is the competition-illegal slam, which would be scary on concrete.

 

[drop bear]

That aspect of MMA is definitely well-suited to dealing with a larger, stronger attacker (plenty of videos on that one). The only significant risk there is that a lighter defender loses some effective tools (bodyweight techniques don't have as much effect, especially on a strong attacker), and the most natural defense to a significant segment of BJJ is the competition-illegal slam, which would be scary on concrete.

Unless of course your bjj is for mma in which case you can slam away. Have a videos of a mate doing it somewhere on you tube. Ended the fight right there.