How can you become a good fighter if self-defense is your goal?

[Deleted member 39746]

so i ask again, though as youve done neither tma or combative im not sure why im bothering, what skills would you learn in coms that you couldn't also get from tma in the same time frame

Under revisement i am only reply to this point and it only needs this reply.

thats basically my fundemental point, the scope of combatives is diffrent to martial arts.

If you question if you should as the same question again, i question if i should repeat myself.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Aren't you also the guy who's suggested isolating techniques to use? Or do I have you confused with someone else?

Yes!

I'm the guy to suggest to test any MA skill (such as dagger S cut) for 15 rounds and record the result. If you have 6 months daily sport testing record, you will know exactly where your MA skill stand. When you do that, you are using the "sport" approach.

 

[skribs]

Under revisement i am only reply to this point and it only needs this reply.



If you question if you should as the same question again, i question if i should repeat myself.

Can someone translate this post into English, please?

 

[jobo]

Can someone translate this post into English, please?

if your going to point out his lack of ma knowledge/experiences he is going to take his bat and ball home, is a reasonably accurate translation

 

[skribs]

if your going to point out his lack of ma knowledge/experiences he is going to take his bat and ball home, is a reasonably accurate translation

That's more understandable, but I don't understand the metaphor.

 

[jobo]

That's more understandable, but I don't understand the metaphor.

what bat and ball ?

its a kid you cant win at cricket ( substitute base ball) who takes his bat and ball home, so its a metaphor for going off in a sulk and spoiling the game for others

 

[skribs]

what bat and ball ?

its a kid you cant win at cricket ( substitute base ball) who takes his bat and ball home, so its a metaphor for going off in a sulk and spoiling the game for others

Maybe when schools re-open, he could seek training instead of sulking.

Solve 2 birds with one stone. We'll stop giving him a hard time, and he'd actually learn something.

 

[drop bear]

i did find a knife scenario useful, in that against my partner who was athletic, i was never fast enough to not get stabbed,but that then ended the lesson, if im ever faced with an athletic attacker with a knife im in serious trouble, there is no workable solution to it

I think there is a small chance that you can basically ambush them with striking and just continue to use that momentum. Before they can get their wits about them enough to stab you.

 

[Martial D]

Today in China, people train MA only for self-defense and health. Even if they may have trained MA to the highest level, since they don't have real combat experience, if you ask them to step into a ring, it will be a totally suicide.

You may be the best of the best in China, but when you test your skill in the global level, you will find out that you are nobody.

When you teach your students, you tell them that they should train MA for self-defense and health. You don't encourage your students to test their MA skill against people from other MA systems.

How can you become a good fighter (a person who can handle himself in the ring) if your goal is only self-defense and health?

Your thought?

If you want to learn to fight, get a coach

If you want to learn self defense, get a lawyer.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you want to learn to fight, get a coach.

What's the difference between a coach and a teacher?

A: What should I ...?
B: You should ask your Sifu.
C: You should ask your Sensei.
D: You should ask your coach.
E: You should ask your teacher.
F: ...

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think there is a small chance that you can basically ambush them with striking and just continue to use that momentum. Before they can get their wits about them enough to stab you.

He had a good read on that guy from the beginning, when he watched the guy put his hand in his pocket. He kept the range close, which makes it difficult to for the other person to use the weapon. After that it's all about not screwing up "the plan." Things would have been different if the attacker created some distance and then pull out a knife. The video is a good example of the reality of self-defense.

It went through the different phases of self-defense. And it shows just how important the physical aspect is. It clearly shows that being able to fight makes a difference in having good self-defense. Sometimes talking and trying to deescalated the conflict will only go so far. After that guy had is clock clean the situation wend down from 10 - 1 really quick and the conflict ended just as quick

 

[Buka]

I think there is a small chance that you can basically ambush them with striking and just continue to use that momentum. Before they can get their wits about them enough to stab you.

That was a nice combination.

 

[drop bear]

That was a nice combination.

Yeah. That was neat.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I dont mean literally easier to learn, i mean its not like a 540 kick. Compared to things like that. The point and role of combatives is to basically give you the bare bones to fight against a untrained person though. That doesnt require you learning 540 kicks. And i just rememebred the word to decribe it, it focuses pretty much on the highest percentage moves for the most situations that you can do and retain the easiest and use the easiest when on adreniline.


Tradtional martial arts training/comabt sports would do what i wrote above, give you more complex and niche skills for situations and basically be the add on to it.

540 kicks aren't all that common in martial arts. Some systems have them, and they tend to serve one of two purposes from what I've seen: gymnastic performance (for schools that do performance martial arts demos) and physical challenge (something for folks to play with and enjoy after they've gotten the basics down, to keep it interesting and challenging). They are anomolies, and don't define the non-"combatives" systems. "Combatives" is mostly a marketing term used to say, "see, we're not doing martial arts with all that complexity that steals times". From what I've seen, there's not a huge difference once they've been around a while.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i cant argue with ''dont stop'' as a learning point, unless your stopping them from leaving which may not be the best idea.

but knife training that doesnt establish that knife fighting/disarm is a game of speed and reactions is failing in its most basic requirement

Yeah, that last sentence is the thing. If it gives folks the idea that they'll be able to defend against a knife as well as they can a punch, they're being deceived by the training. In knife-defense training, you should get cut/stabbed (with a dull training knife, so not really) kind of a lot.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

They do. But what i mean is more, they may have fluff in some areas where as combatives in principle doesnt or be holding to some rules. And they usually arent hybrids, in the sense you do striking and grappling and cover all aspects of fighting in the system or at least early on.

I have managed to find a apparant P1 KMG curriculum, and to highlight my point, they cover at least the basics in all aspects of fighting. You get some hand strikes, some kicks, some knees, some elbows, breakfall, 360 defence and how that applies to some situations. where as if we look at say boxing, for obvious reasons they only cover the 4 strikes you do in boxing. Its more down to the scope of the system and context of it. Krav maga obviously doesnt exist to put people in a boxing ring to fight in the sport of boxing, boxing doesnt exist to teach you self defence. so fourth. I honestly would deem it mute to compare a system that exists to quickly give somone skills to effectively fight against a untrained attacker to somone who is competing proffesionally in a combat sport.


thats basically my fundemental point, the scope of combatives is diffrent to martial arts.

That description ("You get some hand strikes, some kicks, some knees, some elbows, breakfall, 360 defence and how that applies to some situations.") can be applied to a lot of martial arts. So, what's the difference between those MA and "combatives"? What's the "fluff" you speak of?

(Hint: I know what it is. I also know why it's there. And why it shows up in the long-term combatives programs, too. Do you? The marketing doesn't cover this.)

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Under revisement i am only reply to this point and it only needs this reply.



If you question if you should as the same question again, i question if i should repeat myself.

All you really said in that quote is "they're not covering the same stuff". But you haven't said what it is. Pretty much everything you said comes from the marketing used by the combatives programs. It's good marketing, and I think the folks who wrote it believe what they said. I also know it's not quite as true as they thought.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think there is a small chance that you can basically ambush them with striking and just continue to use that momentum. Before they can get their wits about them enough to stab you.

Good soft control of the knife hand before the striking, too.

 

[drop bear]

I dont mean literally easier to learn, i mean its not like a 540 kick. Compared to things like that. The point and role of combatives is to basically give you the bare bones to fight against a untrained person though. That doesnt require you learning 540 kicks. And i just rememebred the word to decribe it, it focuses pretty much on the highest percentage moves for the most situations that you can do and retain the easiest and use the easiest when on adreniline.


Tradtional martial arts training/comabt sports would do what i wrote above, give you more complex and niche skills for situations and basically be the add on to it.

We take people off the street and put them in the ring in 12 weeks.

This is achieved by training people in high percentage basic skills.

The difference is we can watch the fights and review the systems we use to know what are high percentage basic skills. So that our method is more refined and more likely to work.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

All you really said in that quote is "they're not covering the same stuff". But you haven't said what it is. Pretty much everything you said comes from the marketing used by the combatives programs. It's good marketing, and I think the folks who wrote it believe what they said. I also know it's not quite as true as they thought.

Its more of a neuance. Let me run off some comparisions. if we comapre a comabtives programe to TMA, it covers diffrent things on merit it doest do kata. If we comapre it to a striking or grappling only system, it covers diffrent things as its a hybrid. the scope is meant to be for real life fighting in what ever context so its not comparible with combat sports 1:1 as thats where the nuance should change, but it has more in common with combat sports.


I dont mean something like, the punch is diffrent, but more like there isnt as much fluff around the punch as is the case in some systems and application is more based on what you should do in real life not in a ring. This is the literal interpritation of combatives, as stated earlier RBSD has been coined by people as a marketing ploy and they dont teach good ssytems yet the orgininators of the term (to differentiate themselves from others) did/do good things.

I am also not relaying one is defacto better than the other, just that the term combative should be applied to things more focusing on fighting in reality that the term MA or combat sports or TMA etc doesnt cover, with that there is some blurred lines. And as with everythign there are those terrible systems that coin the term. I am in general not citing the "win every fight with these 4 simple moves" system/advertimseent, but the good ones.

If we look at the start i basically stated comabtives is the basics and as applied to real life and usually only covers the basics. (granted with exeptions and i belive several have added in more complex things for longevity) That doesnt seem like im misselling it or over grandising it. The model for learning in combatives tends to be inebtween showing up for classes and courses, you can get both or either done in the segment.


As for neuances,situational awareness, enviromental awareness, muiltiple attackers, weapons of oppertunity, carried weapons and adreline are the things that come to mind that these things would differ (if only slightly) in dealing with. I think i have explained my viewpoint on sport and how you dont need half of that to be good in a sport as its a sterile enviroment.


Is that a decent enough explination?

@drop bear Not a direct response to yours, but it at least a partial reply or one that seems relivent to your post.

Addendum: In my posts and ramblings about military hand to hand systems (comabtives systems). I have relayed some of the issues and how the scope of each changes. They generally are either for aggression or last ditch situations, usually a mixture of the two. In many places it just starts and ends at a bayonet course and sufficent training to run the course correctly.