For those of you who want to learn how to fight outside of sport:

[GreenieMeanie]

I did respond to that thread.

And it was the same response.

You responded to the thread—not my rebuttal.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

That's fine. But it isn’t really what is being taught to the military. It is military guys selling their own system.

Yes—we covered this. Training is mission specific, and a minority are taught that.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yes, it does NOT matter. So why you keep pointing out every little difference? Most of your posts are about the little difference, the exact position and all.

Like you even trying to distinguish between using the feet to break the fall vs slapping with hands between your chinese wrestling and judo. WHAT DIFFERENCE? I can throw someone so they cannot use feet to break the fall. THE KEY IS TO BREAK THE FALL!!!

I know you are trying very hard to promote CMA, but you have to be fair and have an open mind that other MA is just as good......BASED on who wins the fight. Like I said, if anyone feel so strongly theirs is better, go into the Octagon. STOP MAKING EXCUSES. WIN A FIGHT WITH THEIR STYLE, THAT SAID IT ALL.

Your tone here is all "MMA or bah!" Most folks aren't training to beat a top-level MMA fighter. Most folks won't put in the level of work (because of their priorities) needed to perform at that level, or even solid amateur level. How something is trained is more important than which art it is.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Now, this is new one!!! I guess you have no idea how good their conditioning are!!! You try to fight them after 40?!!!

Can always start something and challenge those MMA people. Or better yet, challenge one of those on the street. You want no rules, that will do it. I am sure one of them will take you up.

Better yet, Xu Xiaodung has like a bounty on his head in China for anyone that can beat him. I heard it's $10K or even more. He's NOT a very good MMA fighter, got beat already, He almost got knocked out by someone that fight like Muy Thai. Start with him first. Beat him up, and go from there. See how that end up first.

Just do it, don't make excuses. If anyone can win over MMA, they'll be famous.

Just want to show this:

You're taking a really aggressive stance on this. Do you know anything about the person you're talking to? Do you know their background? Their age? Because I think you've got a mistaken impression about his point.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This is not the thread for this argument.

Threads here rarely get to stay on precisely what the OP started. This is par for the course on MartialTalk.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Your tone here is all "MMA or bah!" Most folks aren't training to beat a top-level MMA fighter. Most folks won't put in the level of work (because of their priorities) needed to perform at that level, or even solid amateur level. How something is trained is more important than which art it is.

This has turned into precisely that.

Your tone here is all "MMA or bah!" Most folks aren't training to beat a top-level MMA fighter. Most folks won't put in the level of work (because of their priorities) needed to perform at that level, or even solid amateur level. How something is trained is more important than which art it is.

Yes—let’s please return to the intention of this thread, which is providing learning resources.

You wanna debate MMA, versus TMA, versus RBSD, go somewhere else.

 

[drop bear]

You responded to the thread—not my rebuttal.

Fine.

"It would be unethical to scientifically test, in full, edged-weapon work, blunt weapon, and pre-emption work.

That is why you have to find instructors who've done it for real, or learned from people that have done for real--which makes it hard to learn, and allows instructors to charge more, because they know how rare and inaccessible people with their knowledge are. You are paying because of supply and demand, and because of lessons that people almost died learning.

The vast majority of RBSD, rests on pre-emption and detecting pre-violence cues, which is what sets it apart from the rest. You have to use surprise, speed, and greater violence of action than your opponent.
If you did not anticipate the attack to at least some degeree, then you have already lost.

In Libre (Scott Babb), with their sparring, they train taking turns as the aggressor. The defender has to learn to recongnize when to react, and "beat them to the punch." They can't scientifically test the consequences of stabs, but they know enough from documented instances, and experiences in both the street and deployed overseas, how that will go.

You can scientifically test aspects of RBSD, separately, but not as a whole."

Yes and no.

If you can test the parts then you can come up with a consensus.
(I do this whole 2+2=4 speech but honestly it is a lot of hard work)

If you can test the parts then you don't need to rely on what an instructor did. But what you can do.

Which is more important and more truthful.

If RSBD relies on a bunch of elements you are not actually testing. So in the street this would happen differently because of speed or mental state or whatever.

Then you are not testing anything. And the 2+2=4 breaks down.

You can't accurately judge what is best practice from what people do in street fights. Or we would al be standing there with our eyes close throwing imaginary tennis balls at each other.

 

[drop bear]

Yes—we covered this. Training is mission specific, and a minority are taught that.

No. If we look at the combatives I presented they are mostly not mission specific.

And they were pretty major combatives. Mc map and army combatives are wide spread systems in the military.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm calmly giving you an opportunity to be direct. You are the one who has choosen to enter the discussion with passive aggression.

Yes--they cover it, but from what servicemen have told me, their interest is making soldiers remotely competent fighters, not experts.

To my point--I'm only seeing strict MMA here, with absolutely no weapons-work (retention, blades, etc.) or exposure to dirty fighting methods.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfZ0MTmlPlk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdzUJM2Cc9c

I can't think of ever seeind DB be passive-aggressive. Obnoxious and bull-headed, sure. But he's pretty direct and says what he thinks. If you're reading his posts as indirect, I think that's on you.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Fine.

"It would be unethical to scientifically test, in full, edged-weapon work, blunt weapon, and pre-emption work.

That is why you have to find instructors who've done it for real, or learned from people that have done for real--which makes it hard to learn, and allows instructors to charge more, because they know how rare and inaccessible people with their knowledge are. You are paying because of supply and demand, and because of lessons that people almost died learning.

The vast majority of RBSD, rests on pre-emption and detecting pre-violence cues, which is what sets it apart from the rest. You have to use surprise, speed, and greater violence of action than your opponent.
If you did not anticipate the attack to at least some degeree, then you have already lost.

In Libre (Scott Babb), with their sparring, they train taking turns as the aggressor. The defender has to learn to recongnize when to react, and "beat them to the punch." They can't scientifically test the consequences of stabs, but they know enough from documented instances, and experiences in both the street and deployed overseas, how that will go.

You can scientifically test aspects of RBSD, separately, but not as a whole."

Yes and no.

If you can test the parts then you can come up with a consensus.
(I do this whole 2+2=4 speech but honestly it is a lot of hard work)

If you can test the parts then you don't need to rely on what an instructor did. But what you can do.

Which is more important and more truthful.

If RSBD relies on a bunch of elements you are not actually testing. So in the street this would happen differently because of speed or mental state or whatever.

Then you are not testing anything. And the 2+2=4 breaks down.

You can't accurately judge what is best practice from what people do in street fights. Or we would al be standing there with our eyes close throwing imaginary tennis balls at each other.

If that were true, then neither edged weapons work nor modern gunfighting would exist in their current forms. They are informed by decades of law enforcement, hospital, and military records--and more recently, by footage.

Things that are MMA-based can be scientifically tested. Things that not MMA-based require either perfectly preserved knowledge from relevant TMA, or knowledge from real life experiences.

The exception to this is organic medium testing.

I was quite specific, in what I meant by this.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I can't think of ever seeind DB be passive-aggressive. Obnoxious and bull-headed, sure. But he's pretty direct and says what he thinks. If you're reading his posts as indirect, I think that's on you.

He started out as indirect.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

No. If we look at the combatives I presented they are mostly not mission specific.

And they were pretty major combatives. Mc map and army combatives are wide spread systems in the military.

Top tier SOF that are doing low-visibility operations, plain clothes, reconnaissance, clearing the compounds of terrorists, capturing them, killing them—are taught more specialized knife, weapons retention, weapons improvisation, and escapology.

This is what I mean by “mission-specific.”

 

[drop bear]

Top tier SOF that are doing low-visibility operations, plain clothes, reconnaissance, clearing the compounds of terrorists, capturing them, killing them—are taught more specialized knife, weapons retention, weapons improvisation, and escapology.

This is what I mean by “mission-specific.”

I linked a top tier SOF who fought a terrorist. And he choked the guy out.

That isn't specialised. In the way you are suggesting.

 

[drop bear]

I can't think of ever seeind DB be passive-aggressive. Obnoxious and bull-headed, sure. But he's pretty direct and says what he thinks. If you're reading his posts as indirect, I think that's on you.

I am like an onion.

I have layers.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I linked a top tier SOF who fought a terrorist. And he choked the guy out.

That isn't specialised. In the way you are suggesting.

The moment people clearly start using strawmen, is typically when I quit engaging with them.

 

[frank raud]

It is part of the curriculum, but I have yet to come across an instructor who thinks this method is universally reliable, given the blades people tend to carry.

When you say you haven't come across an instructor who thinks it's universally reliable, are you dpeaking of MBC instructors, or instructors of different styles? Many instructors will tell you reverse grip fighting is a waste of time, yet others instructors have developed a full curriculum around it

 

[GreenieMeanie]

When you say you haven't come across an instructor who thinks it's universally reliable, are you dpeaking of MBC instructors, or instructors of different styles? Many instructors will tell you reverse grip fighting is a waste of time, yet others instructors have developed a full curriculum around it

Both. The only reason MBC pracitioners I dealt with liked it, was because they thought it would look better in court.

Each style has it's applications and limitations.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

....

I am like an onion.

I have layers.

And you smell like an ogre.

 

[Buka]

I am like an onion.

I have layers.

And you can make people cry.

 

[Ironbear24]

I’m not sure I understand what your overall message is.

I'm in the same boat as you, I don't understand his point.