Does Your Martial Art Teach Self Defence?

[Chris Parker]

So do I. You're hardly alone there.

I'll put together a list of self defence traits and attributes tomorrow... currently answering another thread... and that's a post that'll make these ones look like haiku. But I agree, I haven't really defined it yet, and that's been because I've been watching how others are taking the comments. I'll give it another day, then get back to you.

 

[SENC-33]

The only "self defense" technique that works in harmony with what you train is a pre-emptive strike because it's the only technique you will ever have full control over. If somebody is stupid enough to grab you then yes you will have some control over what you do but when chaos hits and punches come from everywhere those pretty "technique" blocks and traps become of little use.

 

[RTKDCMB]

But I ran up on this page which I thought had some interersting points that go along with some of the comments on this thread.

http://www.functionalselfdefense.org/martial-arts-dont-work

I had a bit of a read, the guy sounds like he spent 5 minutes in a crappy martial arts school and then decided to paint all martial arts with the same brush. Someone like him pops up every now and then, they claim that traditional martial arts are useless and think they have come up with something better. Here's a simple concept - 90% of people who think that 90% of what martial arts teach is useless are 90% full of crap 90% of the time. "One simple technique to stop all punching attacks" jumps out as a bit overly simplistic. I don't know what he thinks goes on in an average martial arts class but he is way off on many things. His video on the fundamental 5 did not look any more effective than what you would find in your standard martial arts class. He also goes out of his way to state how martial arts like Karate have unrealistic attacks and then shows in his video of his fundamental 5 an attacker that does one attack and then stands there, sometimes completely still, and lets him do his defence with no resistance (the very thing he was complaining about). He has some good ideas but little understanding of actual martial arts training.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Hi Chris. I started to read your exceedingly long post. You know, the one where your the only one that's right and we're all wrong. Then I thought to myself 'why bother'? So anyway, you have yourself a really nice day.

Btw, you can save yourself the time of the obligatory snarky response as I won't be reading that one either.

Second Btw, I'm right and your wrong :lol2:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

your the only one that's right and we're all wrong. Then I thought to myself 'why bother'?

I feel the same way too. No matter what we may say, we are not going to change Chris's mind. Just let him to state his view and let us to state our views.

To me, "fist meets face" is all I care about. I don't intend to wrap it around with some fancy words.

http://imageshack.us/a/img198/6285/rjrl.jpg

 

[donald1]

I don't think that's very accurate. Sword arts (eastern or western...), for one example, are not exactly usable for self defense in todays world.

Would martial arts that is sports used go in this category

 

[Dirty Dog]

Would martial arts that is sports used go in this category

That would depend, in part, on whether it was a martial SPORT or a martial ART that uses some subset of the art in a sporting setting.

 

[K-man]

I'd argue that there's a difference between a legal definition to differentiate from assault and self defence as a practiced application. The legal one only begins at the end of the practiced form.

Great, now we have that out of the way. Perhaps we could argue that further in a different thread. Here I am only interested in how effective people feel their training is to defend themselves if that was ever required. I don't care what the method of protecting yourself is called.
:asian:

 

[K-man]

The only "self defense" technique that works in harmony with what you train is a pre-emptive strike because it's the only technique you will ever have full control over. If somebody is stupid enough to grab you then yes you will have some control over what you do but when chaos hits and punches come from everywhere those pretty "technique" blocks and traps become of little use.

A preemptive strike implies you have that option. Then, to make it work with maximum effect means you need to get a clean shot and if there are witnesses it may appear that you were the aggressor.

So then let's talk about the 'chaos'. Blocking is instinctive. The most effective 'block' I have seen is the Krav 'helmet' which is based on instinct. I don't train any other blocks at all so not having 'pretty technique blocks' doesn't apply just as they don't exist if you are fighting under pressure as in MMA. Traps are another thing because again, clinching is instinctive. Again referring to Krav, the Krav 360 defence is based on instinct. It consists of an attack (which some might call a 'block' if not performed properly) on the incoming arm and the neck followed by a lock on that arm and a clinch than allows the continuing attack with the knee. All of this is gross motor skill stuff.

The training we do in other MAs depends on the MA and the purpose of training. But in reality we train to make the techniques automatic. The more complex the system the harder it is to learn and apply in real life. If you look at boxing you have about five punches and a couple of protective techniques including the clinch. If you want to learn something quickly, that is the way to go and at full speed looks like the chaos you refer to. Again it is gross motor.

You look at some other MAs and they contain so much material you might wonder if they could ever be used effectively which brings us back to the OP. Does the complexity of the MA reflect in how effective people feel their training is when it comes to defending themselves?
:asian:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You look at some other MAs and they contain so much material you might wonder if they could ever be used effectively which brings us back to the OP. Does the complexity of the MA reflect in how effective people feel their training is when it comes to defending themselves?
:asian:

Sometime you train some skill just to reduce the amount of risk that you may have to take. For example, you can walk toward your opponent and land your fist on his face. That training will be so simple. The problem is since you have to pass the kicking range, your opponent's kick and knee may give you problem. In order to reduce your risk, you have to use your leading leg to "jam" your opponent's leading leg when you move in. This way you can eliminate your opponent's leg mobility. This will make your simple "fist meets face" more complicate. What if your opponent blocks your punch? You have to deal with his blocking arm, and throw your 2nd punch. Now a simple "fist meets face" get even more complicate.

IMO, a complicate system usually has already considered all those issues. A fight can be as simple as "fist meets face". It can be complicate if your opponent is about your level.

 

[K-man]

Originally Posted by K-man
and in the kendo clip that Chris posted as an example of something he trained that would not be used for self defence, I recognised multiple examples of potential unarmed 'self defence'.

Er.... "kendo"? Where was that?

If you're talking about the Kenjutsu clip, yeah, there can be some things that can be extrapolated, at a pinch, but that's really completely beside the point of that art. There's quite a lot that you'd need to get past first, if you were to make it into anything like a self defence system, you'd need to completely throw out everything that makes it the art that it is... which makes the entire activity pointless.

Maybe the fact that it had Kendo-World plastered all over it caused my confusion!

 

[MJS]

In a recent post the observation was made that training a martial art doesn't automatically teach self defence. I would like to explore whether you think that your Martial Art does equip you with the skills needed to defend yourself on the street if the need were to arise.

Yes. Of course, IMO, one shouldn't assume that the techs that are learned, are a sure shot solution to things. What I mean is...we hear all the time, "Well, I learned this tech from my teacher, and he used the tech, and it worked, so it'll work for me too!" Umm...no, not exactly. Just because someone has success, doesn't mean the next guy will. And personally, I don't care about the other guy making it work, I care if *I* can make it work! LOL! So, that said, we need to take what we're learning, and test it in the dojo, under various circumstances.

 

[K-man]

Yes. Of course, IMO, one shouldn't assume that the techs that are learned, are a sure shot solution to things. What I mean is...we hear all the time, "Well, I learned this tech from my teacher, and he used the tech, and it worked, so it'll work for me too!" Umm...no, not exactly. Just because someone has success, doesn't mean the next guy will. And personally, I don't care about the other guy making it work, I care if *I* can make it work! LOL! So, that said, we need to take what we're learning, and test it in the dojo, under various circumstances.

As was pointed out in another post, under stress the fine motor skills go and a fight can be just a lot of swinging arms and legs. So it's not about making any one technique work, or a pre-drilled combination for that matter. What I'm looking for is whether people feel their training is giving them the skills required to defend themselves should the need arise.
:asian:

 

[MJS]

As was pointed out in another post, under stress the fine motor skills go and a fight can be just a lot of swinging arms and legs. So it's not about making any one technique work, or a pre-drilled combination for that matter.

Agreed. I was simply using that as an example. Some think that when they learn something called a "SD tech" that it's a sure shot thing. It's not, as we agree on the reasons you gave.

What I'm looking for is whether people feel their training is giving them the skills required to defend themselves should the need arise.
:asian:

Yes, I feel that the training that I have gives me the skills to defend myself.

 

[Dirty Dog]

As was pointed out in another post, under stress the fine motor skills go and a fight can be just a lot of swinging arms and legs. So it's not about making any one technique work, or a pre-drilled combination for that matter. What I'm looking for is whether people feel their training is giving them the skills required to defend themselves should the need arise.
:asian:

If you changed this to "under stress the fine motor skills may go", I'd be in complete agreement. It certainly happens. But it also doesn't happen all the time, nor does it happen to every person.

And as I said before, since I use my training on a regular basis (Colorado has had a lot of people smoking spice this fall...) I am confident that it does.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

If you changed this to "under stress the fine motor skills may go", I'd be in complete agreement. It certainly happens. But it also doesn't happen all the time, nor does it happen to every person.

This is a valid point. I honestly don't know how many times I've been required to use force. The most recent was yesterday afternoon. There have been times I've felt and adrenaline dump, most times I have not. Early on in my career I'd occasionally get tunnel vision. Anymore I don't seem to get that at all. Training has much to do with this of course, as does experience. But other factors will play into it, some of which are beyond our control. As an example, physical stress (such as an illness) or emotional distress (your girlfriend just broke up with you) or your physical condition can play a role on how you may be effected in a crisis situation. Outside stimuli may also play a part i.e. incliment weather, dim light, loud noises, bright lights or flashes, fatigue etc can play a role.

 

[Kframe]

As was pointed out in another post, under stress the fine motor skills go and a fight can be just a lot of swinging arms and legs. So it's not about making any one technique work, or a pre-drilled combination for that matter. What I'm looking for is whether people feel their training is giving them the skills required to defend themselves should the need arise.
:asian:

My question is, and this applies to my new art, and to arts like Parker Kenpo that use set sequences. Why do they use so many preset drills and sequences if your unlikely to pull them off as scripted in a real adrenalin fueled situation? Such as self defense. Way back when I was very interested in learning kenpo(thanks to Perfect Weapon) but there was none available in my state. I remember question the need for literally hundreds of preset sequences, with some flavors of kenpo such as Tracy's having like 600+ preset sequences.

I cant really see the point of all those set sequences is to be able to pull them off in a fight. Do they exist to teach principals that can be applied in a fight? I had been watching lots of Kenpo sparring and it looks nothing like how they train. No five swords, no dance of death, no triggered Salute, etc.

If they exist to teach principals, then why do you need 600+ sequences for that?

 

[K-man]

My question is, and this applies to my new art, and to arts like Parker Kenpo that use set sequences. Why do they use so many preset drills and sequences if your unlikely to pull them off as scripted in a real adrenalin fueled situation? Such as self defense. Way back when I was very interested in learning kenpo(thanks to Perfect Weapon) but there was none available in my state. I remember question the need for literally hundreds of preset sequences, with some flavors of kenpo such as Tracy's having like 600+ preset sequences.

I cant really see the point of all those set sequences is to be able to pull them off in a fight. Do they exist to teach principals that can be applied in a fight? I had been watching lots of Kenpo sparring and it looks nothing like how they train. No five swords, no dance of death, no triggered Salute, etc.

If they exist to teach principals, then why do you need 600+ sequences for that?

To me it is an important question. I wrote earlier that some styles, particular the ones with a sporting flavour, include a lot of 'filler' in their training. I am 'anti' anything that says if this happens, do a) and if this happens, do b) and if his other hand is up do c). I would much rather teach principles that work against a wide spectrum of attacks. I have said many timed, train the technique, drill the technique and forget the technique. That becomes an almost impossible mission when you get to that many preset sequences. Many people think of Aikido as complex. It has 12 techniques. Of course there are variations of those techniques but at the base level, just 12. The next principle is 'enter with irimi, hit with kokyu'. How simple is that?
:asian:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If they exist to teach principals, then why do you need 600+ sequences for that?

Our life will be too short to be able to master all 600+ sequences. If we try to be good on everything, we will end with nothing.

IMO, the best way to train is just concentrate on 4 moves per month. Next month, we can concentrate another 4 different moves. This way we will always have 4 moves sharp enough to use if needed. Since we may change our moves every month, we won't get too boring this way.

I'll always try to pick up 2 moves for uniform stance (both have same side forward), and 2 moves for mirror stance (both have different sides forward). This way, I can conver myself in both situations.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Many people think of Aikido as complex. It has 12 techniques. Of course there are variations of those techniques but at the base level, just 12. The next principle is 'enter with irimi, hit with kokyu'. How simple is that?
:asian:

The Chinese wrestling can be categoried into 4 sides and 2 doors. If one needs to cover all categories, he only need 6 techniques. Since many techniques may use exactly the same set up, if you can set up for your leg lift (Uchi Mata), you can use it for your inner hook (Ouchi Gari) or your leg spring (...). This way, 6 techniques can easily be expanded into 20 techniques.

Trying to learn 600 techniques (or combo sequences) is not only impossible but also waste training time.