FASD Street Fighting Strategy

[First Action]

Well, have fun drifting around seeking a receptive audience rather than a qualified one

But i have been seeking the audience of this forum... ?

Anyway, not important.. I did how-ever come to this realisation this morning..

The problem is that since FASD Fight Training is not a martial art, the place I thought it would fit was in self defense. Clearly it is not. What it actually is, is just a different method of fighting.


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]In case anyone cares (i realise this statement is open to 'attack', but some of the comments on other threads have made me giggle more than just a little) I am currently updating literature to reflect as such.[/FONT]
--
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT]So thanks again for your input and honesty. I would not have come to this realisation without it.

Also, id just like to point out that you have been basing all your opinions of FASD on a single chapter

Chris - i cant remember if Ive said it yet but my reasons for being here are not to prove myself or seek approval. All I want to do is share ideas and learn from others. My back-ground of knowledge should not be of concern. Does it really matter if someone has given me a certificate or not? If you do not like my ideas, dont read my posts.

So now, to totally go against all of that, here is a cut and paste of 'my background'..

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Iwas introduced to Martial Arts (Jiu-Jitsu) around 1990. My familymoved every few years and I enjoyed learning from many schools ofthought so I studied a number of different styles (Shoalin Kung Fu,Jeet Kune Do, Ninjitsu, Boxing, Muay Thai, Shoot Wrestling, Arnissand other various eclectic schools) but never really dedicated toone. [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]In2003 I discovered my passion of travel. I still wanted to train andliked the informality and combination of stand-up and grappling ofMMA (Mixed Martial Arts) so whenever I was settled for a month or 2 Iwould pay on a class by class basis. Also, many MMA gyms offeredother classes (fitness, Muay Thai, Boxing, Brazillian Jiu-Jitsu etc)that I could take advantage of. This, however, did not satisfy mywant for training in weaponry and self defense type techniques, so Ibegan self training.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Selftraining is fine whilst travelling. It is a good way to keep fit andcontinue to practice your skills. However, when-ever I decided tostay in one place for more than a week or two, I discovered that Idid not have anyone I could spar with. MMA gyms where good forunarmed sparring, but my fight training had weaponry and othertechniques not used in MMA. I decided to create a training program,with the specific aim of training others to have the competance tospar in a short time. [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]InitiallyI just trained friends. In 2009 I took a year off traveling so beganteaching my method commercially in Australia. I called it FirstAction Self Defense (FASD). During that year it became apparent to methat Self Defense was much more than just fighting, so I extened FASDto encompasses all aspects of self preservation. The aim being thatif you are ever in any type of danger, whatever it may be, you’llhave the best possible chance to survive.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]In2010 I started traveling again. As I travel I continue to researchand improve FASD in all it's areas. (Withthe philosophy of constant improvement, FASD will continue to bedeveloped and improved for years to come.) I also facilitate trainingcourses (friends and commercially) in all areas of FASD to anyone whowants to learn. [/FONT]

 

[Chris Parker]

Oh dear...

But i have been seeking the audience of this forum... ?

That's kinda the point Cyriacus was making, there... here, you have a "qualified" audience (in other words, one who knows what they're talking about, an informed audience is perhaps better), with the only positive response I've seen for you on fighttips, where, honestly, the lack of understanding there on these topics is enormous. They're a MMA forum, and know what works for MMA, with no real understanding of self defence at all (this was seen from reading through a lot of their forum). They would be your "receptive" audience... one that's happy to pat you on the back, and tell you you're doing good. People who know what they're talking about won't. And, as you're not getting the reception you're after here, you've said that you're going to stop bringing this "project" up here... in other words, you're looking for people who will tell you you're doing the right things, rather than tell you what you really need to hear, which is that you're completely unqualified to even begin to attempt teaching these topics.

Anyway, not important.. I did how-ever come to this realisation this morning..

The problem is that since FASD Fight Training is not a martial art, the place I thought it would fit was in self defense. Clearly it is not. What it actually is, is just a different method of fighting.


In case anyone cares (i realise this statement is open to 'attack', but some of the comments on other threads have made me giggle more than just a little) I am currently updating literature to reflect as such.
--

So thanks again for your input and honesty. I would not have come to this realisation without it.

No.

The problem is that all the advice you offer is bad, and that you have no idea of what you're talking about. That then extends into you having no place thinking of yourself as being in a position to teach these topics, which is really where all this is coming from, and is what you should have taken out of this.

Also, id just like to point out that you have been basing all your opinions of FASD on a single chapter

No.

My opinion is based on your entire website, your facebook page, your twitter page, all of your videos (before you closed down the channel... and before you came up with the weak, easily disprovable excuses over on MAP that you'd "forgotten" they were there... even though the way I found them was from a blog link on your own website, by you, two days ago to one of the clips), your posts, and so on. You have no idea what you're talking about, and are completely unqualified to teach these topics.

Chris - i cant remember if Ive said it yet but my reasons for being here are not to prove myself or seek approval. All I want to do is share ideas and learn from others. My back-ground of knowledge should not be of concern. Does it really matter if someone has given me a certificate or not? If you do not like my ideas, dont read my posts.

And wow, do you miss the point there... it's got nothing to do with "proving yourself", it's to do with the fact that you're presenting yourself as a teacher of self defence, and your ideas are so far out of whack with reality that yes, your background of knowledge is absolutely of concern. If you have no real background, no real experience, no real basis for what you're presenting as "good advice and instruction", then yes, it's absolutely of concern.

So now, to totally go against all of that, here is a cut and paste of 'my background'..

Iwas introduced to Martial Arts (Jiu-Jitsu) around 1990. My familymoved every few years and I enjoyed learning from many schools ofthought so I studied a number of different styles (Shoalin Kung Fu,Jeet Kune Do, Ninjitsu, Boxing, Muay Thai, Shoot Wrestling, Arnissand other various eclectic schools) but never really dedicated toone.


In2003 I discovered my passion of travel. I still wanted to train andliked the informality and combination of stand-up and grappling ofMMA (Mixed Martial Arts) so whenever I was settled for a month or 2 Iwould pay on a class by class basis. Also, many MMA gyms offeredother classes (fitness, Muay Thai, Boxing, Brazillian Jiu-Jitsu etc)that I could take advantage of. This, however, did not satisfy mywant for training in weaponry and self defense type techniques, so Ibegan self training.


Selftraining is fine whilst travelling. It is a good way to keep fit andcontinue to practice your skills. However, when-ever I decided tostay in one place for more than a week or two, I discovered that Idid not have anyone I could spar with. MMA gyms where good forunarmed sparring, but my fight training had weaponry and othertechniques not used in MMA. I decided to create a training program,with the specific aim of training others to have the competance tospar in a short time.


InitiallyI just trained friends. In 2009 I took a year off traveling so beganteaching my method commercially in Australia. I called it FirstAction Self Defense (FASD). During that year it became apparent to methat Self Defense was much more than just fighting, so I extened FASDto encompasses all aspects of self preservation. The aim being thatif you are ever in any type of danger, whatever it may be, you’llhave the best possible chance to survive.


In2010 I started traveling again. As I travel I continue to researchand improve FASD in all it's areas. (Withthe philosophy of constant improvement, FASD will continue to bedeveloped and improved for years to come.) I also facilitate trainingcourses (friends and commercially) in all areas of FASD to anyone whowants to learn.

So you did little bits of this and that, with no real basis, no commitment to anything, thinking only of mechanics, and then made a bunch of stuff up. Your longest training is a couple of classes here and there ("when settled for a month or two"), and then a lot of "self training" (in what?)....

Dude, you've learnt a couple of words, maybe a phrase or two, in half a dozen languages, but no diction, no grammar, no structure, no syntax, no conjugation, no formality, and have no fluency or even proper accent or pronunciation.... yet, you're teaching people to "speak foreign languages".

You have no experience, no basis, nothing at all that qualifies you to be a teacher of self defence. You really shouldn't be thinking of yourself as a teacher, you've never even really been a student.

 

[Cyriacus]

Everything Chris said - Additionally, Fighttips is mostly teenagers whos experience comes from high school. Thats not a joke, mind you. Ask them.

But i have been seeking the audience of this forum... ?

Anyway, not important.. I did how-ever come to this realisation this morning..

The problem is that since FASD Fight Training is not a martial art, the place I thought it would fit was in self defense. Clearly it is not. What it actually is, is just a different method of fighting.

Actually, its a poor attempt at emulating self defense. I personally dont value Martial Arts very highly. Im far from biased.

In case anyone cares (i realise this statement is open to 'attack', but some of the comments on other threads have made me giggle more than just a little) I am currently updating literature to reflect as such.
--

So thanks again for your input and honesty. I would not have come to this realisation without it.

Also, id just like to point out that you have been basing all your opinions of FASD on a single chapter

A single chapter that talks about the contents of the book. If you spent a whole chapter providing useless information i dont expect much better from the book.

Chris - i cant remember if Ive said it yet but my reasons for being here are not to prove myself or seek approval. All I want to do is share ideas and learn from others. My back-ground of knowledge should not be of concern. Does it really matter if someone has given me a certificate or not? If you do not like my ideas, dont read my posts.

So if someone doesnt agree with you or support you, you dont want them to read your post? So you only want people who agree with you to talk to you?
Mate, were all here to learn. But you have to be receptive to learning for that to happen.

Your credentials arent important. Where youre getting your information from is. It IS and SHOULD be the concern of anyone whos reading any of what you have to say. Im not going to learn to wrestle from a gymnast whos never wrestled.

So now, to totally go against all of that, here is a cut and paste of 'my background'..

Iwas introduced to Martial Arts (Jiu-Jitsu) around 1990. My familymoved every few years and I enjoyed learning from many schools ofthought so I studied a number of different styles (Shoalin Kung Fu,Jeet Kune Do, Ninjitsu, Boxing, Muay Thai, Shoot Wrestling, Arnissand other various eclectic schools) but never really dedicated toone.


In2003 I discovered my passion of travel. I still wanted to train andliked the informality and combination of stand-up and grappling ofMMA (Mixed Martial Arts) so whenever I was settled for a month or 2 Iwould pay on a class by class basis. Also, many MMA gyms offeredother classes (fitness, Muay Thai, Boxing, Brazillian Jiu-Jitsu etc)that I could take advantage of. This, however, did not satisfy mywant for training in weaponry and self defense type techniques, so Ibegan self training.


Selftraining is fine whilst travelling. It is a good way to keep fit andcontinue to practice your skills. However, when-ever I decided tostay in one place for more than a week or two, I discovered that Idid not have anyone I could spar with. MMA gyms where good forunarmed sparring, but my fight training had weaponry and othertechniques not used in MMA. I decided to create a training program,with the specific aim of training others to have the competance tospar in a short time.


InitiallyI just trained friends. In 2009 I took a year off traveling so beganteaching my method commercially in Australia. I called it FirstAction Self Defense (FASD). During that year it became apparent to methat Self Defense was much more than just fighting, so I extened FASDto encompasses all aspects of self preservation. The aim being thatif you are ever in any type of danger, whatever it may be, you’llhave the best possible chance to survive.

You didnt succeed.

In2010 I started traveling again. As I travel I continue to researchand improve FASD in all it's areas. (Withthe philosophy of constant improvement, FASD will continue to bedeveloped and improved for years to come.) I also facilitate trainingcourses (friends and commercially) in all areas of FASD to anyone whowants to learn.

See, you say youre here to learn, then no matter how much criticsm you receive, you talk about giving people courses and training, whilst 'improving' your system. If you dont want negative feedback, you shouldnt risk getting any to begin with. If you get negative feedback and dont accept it, maybe its you who should be ignoring us.

 

[WC_lun]

Terrible freaking advice in OP. How to streetfight? Really? Its a bunch of theorycraft malarky based upon ego and fantasy. Here's the bare bones of street fighting or AKA self defense, don't put your **** in a place where you will find trouble. if you have accidently put your butt in a bad place, do what you have to do to get out of that place as quickly as you can, using violence as a last resort. IF violence happens, know what is real and what isn't. That means using crap that you know intimately and know the likely results of using it. Adrenaline and fear will f up the best laid plans and really mess with your finer motor skills. So all this do this and don't do that advice will be at best wasted, at worse a hindrance that keeps someone from just reacting. I really, really despise these advice post on what to do in a fight. Very few of them have anything worth while.

 

[Aiki Lee]

Everyone has already made any point I was going to make on what is wrong with your viewpoint towards self-defense and fighting. I'm just here to add my support to what has already been said by those whose posts I've placed a thanks under.
I want you to know First Action, that we aren't trying to insult you, it just seems based off what you've presented that you haven't had any solid education in martial arts. If you did (and I encourage you to seek out an art you like now) you would see how your assumptions simply don't match reality.

 

[First Action]

This post is probably just going to piss you off even more cause im just going to write.. but whatever..

I skimmed through your posts and im not going to address eveything cause its basically the same thing you guys have been saying in different words, and Id probably just repeat the same responses in different words.

I do have an observation for you though. Its a bit off the thread topic topic but that doesnt seem to be a concern.

I've only been active on the forums for about a week, and I posted the exact same posts on numerous forums. I got a variety of responces. Some negative and some positive. I continued to post and converse with all views of thought . Heres what I noticed. This forum and map have very similiar views, and most of you have very similiar ways of expressing them. I think alot of you, like me, are members of both.. so the 'culture' is the same.

Yes, fight tips is more receptive, which may be due to the points some of you raised, but they seem to understand my questions straight away, and then respond accordingly and on topic. Another forum I post on is selfprotection.com. I mention them because they are like a happy medium. From what Ive read on that forum, some of them have a ton of experience, and they also have many of the same views as you guys but they express them in a very different way. Its hard or me to explain it.. but I gues its like the difference of in real life someone asks you to do something, or someone asks you to do something with a smile. Dont get me wrong, they are not all like that... Ive been slayed pretty hard there too, I guess the difference is that they all express their opinions in a different way with different points, instead of just 'jumping on the repetitive bandwagon'

-- just an observation

Usually if I think someone is giving poor advice I just ignore it, and if they keep doing it, I start to ignore them as a whole (they usually get a few chances, actually Im quite tolerant so I probs give them more chances than most people would). Im not special with this, almost everyone Ive met does the same. I've mostly done the same here, so why are others different just because we are in a forum setting.

Anyway, in case any of you are still reading (or even started), Im just chillin out for another couple of weeks before I hit the road again... so I've got plenty of time. As you may have noticed I dont take myself or life as a whole too seriously so keep posting and Ill probably just keep responding. Hell, I may even start another thread in a couple of days (assuming I dont get banned)

ahh, free writing is a great way to relax.

Thanks y'all

 

[Cyriacus]

This post is probably just going to piss you off even more cause im just going to write.. but whatever..

It really isnt. None of us are pissed off, as you put it. So far, youve suggested that were both pissed off and emotional. Im led to wonder why that is.

Usually if I think someone is giving poor advice I just ignore it

How do you determine what advice is good and what advice is bad? What qualifies you to determine what advice is good and what advice is bad? Do you consider things which you have written which have been criticized as still being good, by your determination?

Anyway, in case any of you are still reading (or even started), Im just chillin out for another couple of weeks before I hit the road again... so I've got plenty of time. As you may have noticed I dont take myself or life as a whole too seriously so keep posting and Ill probably just keep responding. Hell, I may even start another thread in a couple of days (assuming I dont get banned)

Banned for what? Do you think youve done something wrong?

ahh, free writing is a great way to relax.

Thanks y'all

Sure, but i dont see what you wrote here thats different in tone to your other posts.
As long as you want to discuss this, i dont doubt people will continue to reply. Youre not responding to us, good sir. We are responding to you. And as long as you keep coming back, people will keep responding.

 

[Chris Parker]

http://firstactionselfdefense.net/beat-hostile-gang-street-fight/

Discuss.

 

[jks9199]

http://firstactionselfdefense.net/beat-hostile-gang-street-fight/

Discuss.

Yikes... On so many levels. Bottom line: he's right that fighting a group is a very bad situation. His tactics are, apparently, the result of watching too many tv shows and movies. Among other things -- the leader of a group is often NOT the largest or biggest guy. His tactics are confrontational, and very likely to create the fight he's talking about trying to avoid.

I'd like him to answer my questions in another thread:

What is his basis for claiming authority to teach self defense? Does he know the laws on self defense? Understand the nature of a violent attack, and different types of violence?

 

[Cyriacus]

http://firstactionselfdefense.net/beat-hostile-gang-street-fight/

Discuss.

My pleasure.

"If all this fails and physical conflict is inevitable"

Why are you there again?

"Go for the leader of the attackers first and be excessive on him to warn the others"

Right, because the others arent going to be doing anything, those mentally challenged cowards. Because all gangs are a bunch of wimpy cowards, right? Right? And youre a warrior!

" then encourage them to take their friend to hospital."

Because thats totally going to happen.

"Make use of your peripheral vision to detect the direction and nature of the first attack."

That really wont help much.

"It is usually the person who is the first to move towards you in an aggressive fashion."

Ive never seen the leader of a gang make the first move.

"To give yourself the best chance, you want to have it so you only have to take on one attacker at a time."

Yeah! Stick it to those mentally challenged idiots! Just fight them one at a time!

"This can be achieved by lining them up so that they are forced in each others way. Using single lanes and other surroundings can also aid you in this."

Because thatll totally work.

"You could also push them into each other."

Whilst they stand there and let you because theyre mentally challenged cowards. Like all gang members, right?

"If you do get surrounded, break through the circle and take out who you think is the weakest link."

Because getting out of being surrounded by a gang of people intent on hurting you is as simple as exploiting how mentally challenged they are just going for the weak link youll totally be able to identify before youre curled up on the ball crying like a little girl praying for a chance at survival.

"You may also consider finding a weapon, but keep in mind that if you are disarmed then it is more likely that it will be used against you than if you had not picked it up in the first place."

Because those foolish people will obviously give you enough time to do that. You know, being slow and stupid and all that.

"It is very hard to fight more than one person if you are tangled up, so avoid grappling"

Tell them that. If you have to, that is. They might be too stupid to know how to hold you in place.

" and especially being taken to the ground. This means that you need to take care of your balance more than usual, so unnecessary kicking should not be employed. Work to the flanks, try to gain distance, and always continue to look for escape so that you can run as soon as viable."

...right.



The moral of the story is, theres nothing to discuss. This is basically a whole article insulting the intelligence of gang members and making them out to be a bunch of retards, whilst glorifying the abilities of the vastly superior protagonist.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Not spending more than 2 seconds on youtube, I found this video that effectively contradicts the information found in the link that Chris Parker posted above.. .

As Cyriacus pointed out, the gang/mob/whatever is not going to fight you one at a time like in the movies.. .

 

[jks9199]

I didn't catch the "if you get surrounded, break through and take out the weakest" line...

Let's see how much is wrong with that...

You're in deep doody already because you're surrounded. But you see a way out... and, even more amazingly, you manage to escape. So, you're going to turn around and attack?! OK... What was the goal again? Oh, yeah... survive. You're out -- keep going! Especially since you now have this little legal issue that, if you attack, you've now lost the argument that you were defending yourself without a hell of a lot of justification.

Let me make this real clear. The legal side is at least as important as the physical side. Their is a level of truth in the old saw about being tried by 12... because you must survive for it to matter at all. But if you can't successfully articulate your justifications for you actions, or your actions our outside the law, you may well find yourself as the newest enrollee in Big Bubba's Dancing Class at the state pen... Or seeing the majority of every paycheck you get for the rest of your life going to someone else's family.

What I've seen of First Action's "self defense" ideas seems heavily influenced by tv and movies, and probably a scattered martial arts background. My advice is to do some real training, with people who have authority to speak. That authority can come from training, or experience, or ideally from both.

 

[First Action]

Do you consider things which you have written which have been criticized as still being good, by your determination?

Some of it, yes.

Banned for what? Do you think youve done something wrong?

No

And as long as you keep coming back, people will keep responding.

Excellent

Thanks

 

[First Action]

Hi,

Im just going to respond to Cyriacus points, cause it laid out easy and he brings up alot of things very methodically... so sorry if it doesnt cover everything.

"If all this fails and physical conflict is inevitable"

Why are you there again

--I dont fully understand where you are coming from with this so sorry if I miss the point, perhaps your being mugged??

"Go for the leader of the attackers first and be excessive on him to warn the others"

Right, because the others arent going to be doing anything, those mentally challenged cowards. Because all gangs are a bunch of wimpy cowards, right? Right? And youre a warrior!

--- no, but there is the chance that it will work, and Id rather take the chance then do nothing at all

" then encourage them to take their friend to hospital."

Because thats totally going to happen.

-- it might. and it is the decent thing to do

"Make use of your peripheral vision to detect the direction and nature of the first attack."

That really wont help much.

-- also I believe it takes time to train you perephial vision. Interestingly enough (on a different topic), naturally womens periphial vision is alot better than mens. They rekon it stems form back in the hunter gatherer days where men needed 'long sight' to hunt and women needed to be more aware of whats around them, like kids and that.

but the essence of the sentence is to open yor awareness to where the attack will come from.. im guessing if you are in that situation youll be pretty aware anyway.

"It is usually the person who is the first to move towards you in an aggressive fashion."

Ive never seen the leader of a gang make the first move.

-- agreed

"To give yourself the best chance, you want to have it so you only have to take on one attacker at a time."

Yeah! Stick it to those mentally challenged idiots! Just fight them one at a time!

"This can be achieved by lining them up so that they are forced in each others way. Using single lanes and other surroundings can also aid you in this."

Because thatll totally work.

--- again, it might. and doing something is better than doing nothing

"You could also push them into each other."

Whilst they stand there and let you because theyre mentally challenged cowards. Like all gang members, right?

-- you really like using this point

"If you do get surrounded, break through the circle and take out who you think is the weakest link."

Because getting out of being surrounded by a gang of people intent on hurting you is as simple as exploiting how mentally challenged they are just going for the weak link youll totally be able to identify before youre curled up on the ball crying like a little girl praying for a chance at survival.

--- I dont think the post ever refers to the situation as being simple or that the gang members are retarted (yes I say think, because I havent re-read it.. i suppose I should have done that before replying)

"You may also consider finding a weapon, but keep in mind that if you are disarmed then it is more likely that it will be used against you than if you had not picked it up in the first place."

Because those foolish people will obviously give you enough time to do that. You know, being slow and stupid and all that.

-- Sorry, I didnt mean to say that thig about using the same line all the time.. cause im going to do the same thing... Trying to do something is better than doing nothing

"It is very hard to fight more than one person if you are tangled up, so avoid grappling"

Tell them that. If you have to, that is. They might be too stupid to know how to hold you in place.

-- this is a stupid comment. Im sure deep down you actually agree that grappling when against multiple opponents is a bad idea, so try your best to avoid it.

" and especially being taken to the ground. This means that you need to take care of your balance more than usual, so unnecessary kicking should not be employed. Work to the flanks, try to gain distance, and always continue to look for escape so that you can run as soon as viable."

...right.

-- right

The moral of the story is, theres nothing to discuss. This is basically a whole article insulting the intelligence of gang members and making them out to be a bunch of retards, whilst glorifying the abilities of the vastly superior protagonist.[/QUOTE]

I wish I read this last sentence before I started replying.. then I wouldnt have discussed it.

 

[Chris Parker]

I was kinda hoping you'd discuss your blog post first, but hey, this is fine.

Hi,

Im just going to respond to Cyriacus points, cause it laid out easy and he brings up alot of things very methodically... so sorry if it doesnt cover everything.

Right... I'm going to try to avoid actually correcting you here, just pointing out that you really don't have a clue... and stealing our ideas to give yourself credibility is not something I have any interest in supporting.

"If all this fails and physical conflict is inevitable"

Why are you there again

--I dont fully understand where you are coming from with this so sorry if I miss the point, perhaps your being mugged??

No kidding you don't understand...

"Go for the leader of the attackers first and be excessive on him to warn the others"

Right, because the others arent going to be doing anything, those mentally challenged cowards. Because all gangs are a bunch of wimpy cowards, right? Right? And youre a warrior!

--- no, but there is the chance that it will work, and Id rather take the chance then do nothing at all

The "chance" it might work? So you're saying that you really don't have any experience or education on this topic, any real understanding of how group assaults work, no real understanding of the realities of psychology or it's applications, but you're fine offering this deeply flawed, borderline suicidal line of advice because "there is the chance that it will work"?!?!

Kid, grow up, and realize you don't know the first thing you're trying to teach people about.

" then encourage them to take their friend to hospital."

Because thats totally going to happen.

-- it might. and it is the decent thing to do

Garbage. Firstly, garbage that it might happen, and secondly, garbage that you'd be saying anything like that anywhere other than in the fevered, fantasy-riddled mind of someone who's never experienced anything like real adrenaline or violence. Thirdly, garbage that you need to be concerned about the "decent thing to do"...

"Make use of your peripheral vision to detect the direction and nature of the first attack."

That really wont help much.

-- also I believe it takes time to train you perephial vision. Interestingly enough (on a different topic), naturally womens periphial vision is alot better than mens. They rekon it stems form back in the hunter gatherer days where men needed 'long sight' to hunt and women needed to be more aware of whats around them, like kids and that.

Do you have the first clue about how that is done (training your peripheral vision)? Or why it's needed? Bluntly, I seriously doubt it.

but the essence of the sentence is to open yor awareness to where the attack will come from.. im guessing if you are in that situation youll be pretty aware anyway.

Nope. Quite the opposite, in fact.

"It is usually the person who is the first to move towards you in an aggressive fashion."

Ive never seen the leader of a gang make the first move.

-- agreed

So... you agree that Cyriacus' observation, which goes completely contrary to your written statements about who you think instigates the attack, is correct? When what he said was basically "You're completely wrong"? Really?

"To give yourself the best chance, you want to have it so you only have to take on one attacker at a time."

Yeah! Stick it to those mentally challenged idiots! Just fight them one at a time!

"This can be achieved by lining them up so that they are forced in each others way. Using single lanes and other surroundings can also aid you in this."

Because thatll totally work.

--- again, it might. and doing something is better than doing nothing

No, it really is such a low-percentage tactic that it's not really an option the way you presented it. And it's not the only option other than "do nothing". And yes, it could result in far worse consequences than even doing nothing. You're better off learning a better, more high-return, more effective set of strategies... at this point, you don't even know how to recognize what they would be. And no, I'm not about to give you anything that you will steal and put up as your own work.

"You could also push them into each other."

Whilst they stand there and let you because theyre mentally challenged cowards. Like all gang members, right?

-- you really like using this point

Because it's the only way your tactics would have a chance of being effective. Understand?

"If you do get surrounded, break through the circle and take out who you think is the weakest link."

Because getting out of being surrounded by a gang of people intent on hurting you is as simple as exploiting how mentally challenged they are just going for the weak link youll totally be able to identify before youre curled up on the ball crying like a little girl praying for a chance at survival.

--- I dont think the post ever refers to the situation as being simple or that the gang members are retarted (yes I say think, because I havent re-read it.. i suppose I should have done that before replying)

You have contextually described the attackers in such a way that has them simply standing around, waiting for you to push them at each other, cowering as you "use your voice and yell", being overwhelmed by your sheer presence, and so on. How would you read that? It's certainly not the behaviour of an actual, real-life gang, especially not a violent one. A group of school children, maybe... if they were very young....

"You may also consider finding a weapon, but keep in mind that if you are disarmed then it is more likely that it will be used against you than if you had not picked it up in the first place."

Because those foolish people will obviously give you enough time to do that. You know, being slow and stupid and all that.

-- Sorry, I didnt mean to say that thig about using the same line all the time.. cause im going to do the same thing... Trying to do something is better than doing nothing

But if the "something" you're suggesting is unrealistic, ineffective, flawed, unfeasible, or based in fantasy, is that really "better than doing nothing"? Incidentally, "nothing" is more likely what you'd do.... for the record...

"It is very hard to fight more than one person if you are tangled up, so avoid grappling"

Tell them that. If you have to, that is. They might be too stupid to know how to hold you in place.

-- this is a stupid comment. Im sure deep down you actually agree that grappling when against multiple opponents is a bad idea, so try your best to avoid it.

A group assault of, say, five on one. Starts with punches, but very (very!) quickly, two or more are grabbing hold of you and holding your arms/legs, as the others continue to punch. Your decision there is....?

" and especially being taken to the ground. This means that you need to take care of your balance more than usual, so unnecessary kicking should not be employed. Work to the flanks, try to gain distance, and always continue to look for escape so that you can run as soon as viable."

...right.

-- right

The problem is not saying "avoid the ground"... that's actually fine. It's the way you describe going about it, as it reflects no understanding or experience in the skills needed, nor in the realities of such events.

The moral of the story is, theres nothing to discuss. This is basically a whole article insulting the intelligence of gang members and making them out to be a bunch of retards, whilst glorifying the abilities of the vastly superior protagonist.

- I wish I read this last sentence before I started replying.. then I wouldnt have discussed it.

Yeah.... replying didn't help you much.

 

[Cyriacus]

I was kinda hoping you'd discuss your blog post first, but hey, this is fine.



Right... I'm going to try to avoid actually correcting you here, just pointing out that you really don't have a clue... and stealing our ideas to give yourself credibility is not something I have any interest in supporting.



No kidding you don't understand...



The "chance" it might work? So you're saying that you really don't have any experience or education on this topic, any real understanding of how group assaults work, no real understanding of the realities of psychology or it's applications, but you're fine offering this deeply flawed, borderline suicidal line of advice because "there is the chance that it will work"?!?!

Kid, grow up, and realize you don't know the first thing you're trying to teach people about.



Garbage. Firstly, garbage that it might happen, and secondly, garbage that you'd be saying anything like that anywhere other than in the fevered, fantasy-riddled mind of someone who's never experienced anything like real adrenaline or violence. Thirdly, garbage that you need to be concerned about the "decent thing to do"...



Do you have the first clue about how that is done (training your peripheral vision)? Or why it's needed? Bluntly, I seriously doubt it.



Nope. Quite the opposite, in fact.



So... you agree that Cyriacus' observation, which goes completely contrary to your written statements about who you think instigates the attack, is correct? When what he said was basically "You're completely wrong"? Really?



No, it really is such a low-percentage tactic that it's not really an option the way you presented it. And it's not the only option other than "do nothing". And yes, it could result in far worse consequences than even doing nothing. You're better off learning a better, more high-return, more effective set of strategies... at this point, you don't even know how to recognize what they would be. And no, I'm not about to give you anything that you will steal and put up as your own work.



Because it's the only way your tactics would have a chance of being effective. Understand?



You have contextually described the attackers in such a way that has them simply standing around, waiting for you to push them at each other, cowering as you "use your voice and yell", being overwhelmed by your sheer presence, and so on. How would you read that? It's certainly not the behaviour of an actual, real-life gang, especially not a violent one. A group of school children, maybe... if they were very young....



But if the "something" you're suggesting is unrealistic, ineffective, flawed, unfeasible, or based in fantasy, is that really "better than doing nothing"? Incidentally, "nothing" is more likely what you'd do.... for the record...



A group assault of, say, five on one. Starts with punches, but very (very!) quickly, two or more are grabbing hold of you and holding your arms/legs, as the others continue to punch. Your decision there is....?



The problem is not saying "avoid the ground"... that's actually fine. It's the way you describe going about it, as it reflects no understanding or experience in the skills needed, nor in the realities of such events.



Yeah.... replying didn't help you much.

Theres nothing i planned on saying that isnt said here. So ill just second all of the above.
I will however add:

"I dont think the post ever refers to the situation as being simple or that the gang members are retarted"

You really do talk about them like a bunch of retards.

 

[Chris Parker]

You know what, I'm going to do FirstAction a little favour here, and suggest he reads the following thread. It also featured a young, largely inexperienced person who put themselves forth as a teacher, despite no real credentials to do so. It may have taken a fair bit, but eventually, he listened, and hopefully is getting the real education he needs to go ahead with his desire to teach and help people. I genuinely hope that he is.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php/81621-The-Destroyer-Style

 

[First Action]

Im pretty tired so Im not going to write too much tonight.

Thanks for the thread link Chris. I read the first couple of pages... robs read a bit more later (its a pretty long thread)

I was kinda hoping you'd discuss your blog post first, but hey, this is fine.

Yeah, sorry bout that. I just reply to the thread I view first.

just pointing out that you really don't have a clue..

.
Youve made this point pretty clear. I can save you some time and say you dont have to say it again. Ill just keep it as a 'tone setter' for when I read your replies to my posts.

The "chance" it might work?

Yes. Because how can you know if something will definitely work.

Garbage. Firstly, garbage that it might happen, and secondly, garbage that you'd be saying anything like that anywhere other than in the fevered, fantasy-riddled mind of someone who's never experienced anything like real adrenaline or violence. Thirdly, garbage that you need to be concerned about the "decent thing to do"...

yeah.. i spose your right. I probs wouldnt suggest it.

Do you have the first clue about how that is done (training your peripheral vision)? Or why it's needed? Bluntly, I seriously doubt it.

I train it, simply by using it when I remember to

Nope. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I disagree. Whenever I think im in a potentially dangeous situation, my awareness definately spikes

So... you agree that Cyriacus' observation, which goes completely contrary to your written statements about who you think instigates the attack, is correct? When what he said was basically "You're completely wrong"? Really?

Yes

No, it really is such a low-percentage tactic that it's not really an option the way you presented it.

Its not tactic where Im say 'just line them up' as the only tactic. I realise it is not that simple. More that it is something to do, while using other tactics. Tactics are used together. (I apologise if my sentences arent making perfect sense gramatically, but you get the idea (hopefully))

And it's not the only option other than "do nothing".

Right

Because it's the only way your tactics would have a chance of being effective. Understand?

Not true. You would not have to be an idiot for these tactics to work. What you may be forgetting is that you guys know how to fight. Alot of people do not. So, yes, i guess you could say they are retarted fighters, but not necessarily retarted.

Also, i know its training, but I have tested these things on other people that also know 'how to fight'

You have contextually described the attackers in such a way that has them simply standing around,

maybe.. unintentional descriptive flaw. But others have read it and understood they where not to be just standing there.

But if the "something" you're suggesting is unrealistic, ineffective, flawed, unfeasible, or based in fantasy, is that really "better than doing nothing"? Incidentally, "nothing" is more likely what you'd do.... for the record...

the tactics arent ineffective if you use them as intended. ie as a collomative (i dont think this is a word) of tactics, together with your combined knowledge of other teachings.

Posts/chapters are meant to be taken in retrospect, together with other posts/chapters. Not any one tactic will work all the time.

A group assault of, say, five on one. Starts with punches, but very (very!) quickly, two or more are grabbing hold of you and holding your arms/legs, as the others continue to punch. Your decision there is....?

my decision?? do whatever I can to escape.

The problem is not saying "avoid the ground"... that's actually fine. It's the way you describe going about it, as it reflects no understanding or experience in the skills needed, nor in the realities of such events.

I didnt describe at all how to avoid it, except maybe the comment of not using kicks. It wasnt something I intended that post to get in to.

Yeah.... replying didn't help you much.

I dont know.. it got some good insights from you

Thanks

 

[EddieCyrax]

1

 

[Chris Parker]

Im pretty tired so Im not going to write too much tonight.

Thanks for the thread link Chris. I read the first couple of pages... robs read a bit more later (its a pretty long thread)

Okay. Honestly, what I'm hoping you get out of it is that, without the proper experience/education, what you're doing is an incredibly bad and dangerous thing to do. Cody (Destroyer Style) actually has some physical talent, a lot more than you showed in your videos, but he was completely ignorant of what was required to teach or develop methods to teach in this area, as are you. Eventually he seemed to realize that... I'm hoping you manage the same.

Yeah, sorry bout that. I just reply to the thread I view first.

Okay, then, when you get to it, can you say where you base your advice on? What experience do you have that leads you to think you can offer advice for group assaults? What training have you gone through in that area?

Youve made this point pretty clear. I can save you some time and say you dont have to say it again. Ill just keep it as a 'tone setter' for when I read your replies to my posts.

The reason I keep repeating it is that you say, as you do here, that you've heard me say it... and then continue to demonstrate that you don't understand just how much you don't have a clue. This post is yet another example. So while you've heard me tell you you don't have a clue, it hasn't sunk in yet.... you still think you have something to offer, and that your opinion on fighting (and self defence) is valid. It isn't.

Yes. Because how can you know if something will definitely work.

You don't seem to get subtlety, so I'll be blunt. Your advice has the same "chance" of working as telling someone that they can win a game of pool by closing their eyes and just swinging the cue across the table... they might hit the cue-ball, and it might knock the other balls into the pockets, but the chances of that happening are so remote that it's not worth advising people to try.

The idea of "how can you know if something will definitely work" is just showing how little you understand here. There are no 100% guarantees in this area, but there are some things that just shouldn't be advised, as they fly in the face of reality. Your advice fits that description. Your advice is bad. It is dangerous. The result of people following your advice would be that they would get themselves beaten up badly, when they could have avoided it entirely. People following your advice would likely be hospitalized. It is purely bad advice, given by someone who really shouldn't be giving advice at all.

yeah.. i spose your right. I probs wouldnt suggest it.

You did suggest it, though. They were your words. Oh, and the reason I copied the entire blog here was to provide an archive if you start editing the original to include your mis-understood take on what we say here. So you know.

Do you have the first clue about how that is done (training your peripheral vision)? Or why it's needed? Bluntly, I seriously doubt it.

I train it, simply by using it when I remember to

So that's a no, then.

I disagree. Whenever I think im in a potentially dangeous situation, my awareness definately spikes

No, it focuses. And unless you understand what that actually means, and what the difference is, then you really shouldn't be stating anything or offering advice.

Yes

You agree that you were completely wrong? And still think that you are offering valid advice in everything else? Can you not see the delusions at work here?

Its not tactic where Im say 'just line them up' as the only tactic. I realise it is not that simple. More that it is something to do, while using other tactics. Tactics are used together. (I apologise if my sentences arent making perfect sense gramatically, but you get the idea (hopefully))

I understand tactics to a much deeper level than you realize, as well as the one you're discussing. And your entire take on it is unrealistic, ill-advised, and dangerous.

Right

Oh dear lord...

Not true. You would not have to be an idiot for these tactics to work. What you may be forgetting is that you guys know how to fight. Alot of people do not. So, yes, i guess you could say they are retarted fighters, but not necessarily retarted.

Also, i know its training, but I have tested these things on other people that also know 'how to fight'

No, the attackers would have to be idiots. And what you're forgetting is that you don't have a clue about the realities you're attempting to address. This entire passage shows that, by the way.

Oh, and I have serious doubts about any validity of your "testing" these things, especially based on the videos of you and your friend. Neither of you have a clue about violence. I actually kinda wish they were still up, just to highlight what I'm talking about. The one on chokes would be best, if you still have a copy...

maybe.. unintentional descriptive flaw. But others have read it and understood they where not to be just standing there.

Except that, once you have pro-active attackers (realistic ones), all your tactics fall in a heap and fail dismally.

the tactics arent ineffective if you use them as intended. ie as a collomative (i dont think this is a word) of tactics, together with your combined knowledge of other teachings.

Posts/chapters are meant to be taken in retrospect, together with other posts/chapters. Not any one tactic will work all the time.

I think you meant "cumulative"... but, to the point, you've missed the point of tactical approaches here. Completely.

my decision?? do whatever I can to escape.

Wow, did you miss the point of that one...

I didnt describe at all how to avoid it, except maybe the comment of not using kicks. It wasnt something I intended that post to get in to.

Yes you did. You described (vaguely) ideas about "looking to your balance more", which is what lead to your comments about not kicking (which is really besides the point... the reasons you would tend not to kick are rather different, which again shows you don't know what you're talking about.... as well as other issues...

I dont know.. it got some good insights from you

Thanks

Right. The insight you should have gotten is that all the advice you have given is deeply, dangerously, fundamentally flawed. The types of people who would read and follow it are those who don't know any better, and trust that someone who has founded their own system/organisation/group named "First Action Self Defence", with the tag-line of "More than just fighting" knows what they're talking about, and don't have the experience to apply critical assessment of the material you're proffering. But the fact is that you don't have the requisite background or experience to offer anything of value, and what you are giving is largely just going to get people hurt. And, as far as the whole "I don't teach self defence, I just teach fighting" that you've started saying now, firstly, no, you don't. You present it as self defence (hell, look at your tag-line), so just just saying that "changing the name is too much bother" shows that you have no concern for anyone looking at your material, or presenting anything accurately. Secondly, you don't have any fighting ability or knowledge, so you're really teaching "First Action Self Defence; Not Even Fighting".

Seriously. There is nothing of value on your site. You present yourself as an expert (just by having the site), and if people trust it, they will get hurt. Badly. I don't care if you just do this yourself, and get yourself beaten up on a daily basis, but if you're going to present it to a worldwide community, then I'm going to be concerned when it is that damn dangerous and poor. And for that reason, I say again:

Stop. Take down the website.

And just stop.