Need actual help. Truly need some Knowledge / Input...

[drop bear]

1. In sparring, the goal is generally to score, not to inflict bodily damage.
2. Thus, the power and depth of penetration will not be as great.
3. Sparring has restricted targets and techniques. Real fight, anything goes, no safety net.
4. Sparring can use more "high risk" techniques as the danger factor is less. Street fighting is no place for fancy techniques or tricky tactics.
5. A match may last 3 minutes or more. A real fight will likely be over in 1, so maximum damage in the minimum amount of time is the strategy. End it ASAP before the X factor bites you in the rear.
6. You enter a sparring match fully prepared, expecting, to fight. And while you should have good situational awareness when walking at night, even occasionally visualizing possible scenarios as you do so, when it actually happens it's still a surprise requiring an immediate ramp-up.

It depends how you learn.

You can learn by rote or learn by technique. And then everything has to match the situation you have trained. The problem you have is then you have to learn thousands of techniques. You have to experience thousands of different situations to cover all the bases.

Then things like a 3 minute fight and a 1 minute fight are thes separate things that you have to train specifically. Or you have to be fully expecting a fight to be able to function.

Or you can train by concept. And then you need to train a lot less things because they fit together all a bit more easily.

Again say all I trained was a really good clinch and hitting people hard.

In a one minute fight clinch hit them hard.

In a high risk fight clinch hit them hard.

You are ambushed clinch hit them hard.

And so on.

One basic concept covers all these bases. And from there you have this platform to build on. So you have a bit more time and space to adjust to any surprises that might come your way.

Really all you are doing is working out what the guy wants and you are basically denying him that.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In a one minute fight clinch hit them hard.

In a high risk fight clinch hit them hard.

You are ambushed clinch hit them hard.

And so on.

I like your finish move too.

https://i.postimg.cc/MGg2JkSF/clinch-uppercut.gif

 

[Deleted member 39746]

You do differentiate the two, but this quote seems like you're equating them? The force level and other thing are different as I detail below:

Typographical error, I reversed the order.

Sparring and sudden volence are force on force, but nothing a like beyond being force on force. The force level in either can very quite a lot, but it all depends how you define both. Like you could have no armour for OPFOR/BLUEFOR so you have to pull your punches on them, and sparring can look like a actual fight or be one as a example. Some people consider sparring to be synonomous with fighting just not at an event. In other words the diffrent in fighting and sparring to some is, where they do it, not level of force.

Thats to explain my point further.


The confusion may just be my writing order/i put the "depends how you define them" point in there. I do consider sparring and sudden violence two seperate things, just in the broader catergory of force on force.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

Yeah. A while back I had to prove 2+2=4.

And the way I did that was to show that all of maths makes sense.

Anyway. Sparring is all of maths. But it exists because the parts make sense.

So when a guy flips out and puts a rush on you. Or you slip on the mat or just get caught. And you have to suddenly swim the deep water. You are engaging those same processes as if you were walking down the street and some random leaps out of the shadows and attacks you.

If I can make the parts work then I win at sparring. And the same if I get jumped all of a sudden for no reason

This idea that you have to lull me in to a dark room and ambush me for me to have a plan to address that isn't really as correct and is more of a self defense myth.

It is very unlikely that someone will attack me in a manner that is so far removed from that sterile application that the basic concept will work against me.

Imagine all I can do is good clinching and throw hard punches.

That is almost 90% of any sort of attack solved.

They are both force on force, if you dont want to do sport then sparring isnt of much use to you, if you take away all the marketing etc, they are both with resiting parties. they arent directly comprable beyond they are both force on force.

although bad training practises or using it as a one trick poney/marketing tool may have skewed the actual view on it, given i dont think there is exactly a course you can go on to set it up well, not as easily accesable as courses/education on how to set up sparring.

The note to take for sudden violence is, you need to know the context, as if the attackers are pretending to be somone less skilled than they are, they probbly arent going to pull out a 540 kick, and intetionally limit themselves as best as they can do it. Second, i can see why somehwere may do a day 1 test, and a day 7 test for a week long course, so you get a base line of how they performed in the scenerio, and then test them after the course of instruction, or along on.

you dont really need to know the context for sparring as much, just loose rules they follow if any, and you can probbly guess by what they are wearing which sport they are doing/ambient gym sounds and enviroment.

 

[drop bear]

They are both force on force, if you dont want to do sport then sparring isnt of much use to you, if you take away all the marketing etc, they are both with resiting parties. they arent directly comprable beyond they are both force on force.

although bad training practises or using it as a one trick poney/marketing tool may have skewed the actual view on it, given i dont think there is exactly a course you can go on to set it up well, not as easily accesable as courses/education on how to set up sparring.

The note to take for sudden violence is, you need to know the context, as if the attackers are pretending to be somone less skilled than they are, they probbly arent going to pull out a 540 kick, and intetionally limit themselves as best as they can do it. Second, i can see why somehwere may do a day 1 test, and a day 7 test for a week long course, so you get a base line of how they performed in the scenerio, and then test them after the course of instruction, or along on.

you dont really need to know the context for sparring as much, just loose rules they follow if any, and you can probbly guess by what they are wearing which sport they are doing/ambient gym sounds and enviroment.

If you add role play you also add another dimension of silliness.

 

[Steve]

You do differentiate the two, but this quote seems like you're equating them? The force level and other thing are different as I detail below:

No, to both of these ideas. While many of the skills in sparring can be applied to the street, these two situations and the "processes" are quite different.

1. In sparring, the goal is generally to score, not to inflict bodily damage.
2. Thus, the power and depth of penetration will not be as great.

Are you suggesting that boxers, thai boxers, San Shou boxers, MMA fighters, etc, are not training to deliver strikes with power and "depth of penetration"? Or are you suggesting that they could be MORE powerful if they didn't spar? Because that sounds kind of silly, frankly.

3. Sparring has restricted targets and techniques. Real fight, anything goes, no safety net.

Are you suggesting then that someone who doesn't spar is more capable of hitting what they're aiming for than someone who does? Or maybe that someone who is training to hit your face, abdomen, liver, thigh, knee, or other "legal" targets will be less able to hit another target than someone who doesn't spar? Because, again, that sounds kind of silly.

4. Sparring can use more "high risk" techniques as the danger factor is less. Street fighting is no place for fancy techniques or tricky tactics.

Isn't this counter to your last point, which is that sparring is too restrictive. Seems like in the streets one would want an arsenal of effective, well trained techniques. Because in a "real fight, anything goes, no safety net."

5. A match may last 3 minutes or more. A real fight will likely be over in 1, so maximum damage in the minimum amount of time is the strategy. End it ASAP before the X factor bites you in the rear.

Okay, which is more likely to succeed, the guy who trains for a three minute fight and has to fight for one, or the guy who trains for a one minute fight but has to fight for three?

6. You enter a sparring match fully prepared, expecting, to fight. And while you should have good situational awareness when walking at night, even occasionally visualizing possible scenarios as you do so, when it actually happens it's still a surprise requiring an immediate ramp-up.

So, take a guy who is well trained to fight, and work with them on situational awareness. The two are unrelated. You can be situationally aware and unable to fight and get mugged, even if you see it coming. You can, as I think you're myopically focusing on, lack situational awareness and get mugged, even though you are a skilled fighter. I think the best option would be to do both.

All these factors combine to require a different mind set for the two activities. The possibility of severe damage or death is a game changer. As drop bear notes, there can be high stress instances in sparring, but nothing like the real thing.

the real question then is, even if we agree on this, how does not learning to fight help with this?

To sum it all up, the deep-seated, in your primal gut, intent to cause severe bodily harm by any means possible is something no sport can replicate. Even heavily padded full power drills (they can get close and give the best simulation to the real thing) are not the real thing.

Beware of seeing these two things as very similar to each other.

I cannot roll my eyes enough at this. I mean, being the most generous as one can be, it's a classic non sequitor. Even if we agree on the premise, that sport cannot replicate the "primal gut, intent to cause severe bodily harm by any means possible," it does not follow that non-sport training is, therefore, more "real."

It's like saying that you cannot replicate realistic wood look and feel with composite decking (a premise which we can agree on), and therefore, cardboard is a better alternative for building your deck.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Are you suggesting that boxers, thai boxers, San Shou boxers, MMA fighters, etc, are not training to deliver strikes with power and "depth of penetration"? Or are you suggesting that they could be MORE powerful if they didn't spar? Because that sounds kind of silly, frankly.

In amateur boxing, the power of the punch does not affect the scoring, as in point karate competition. A hit is a hit. Full contact professional fighters are in a separate class where power does affect the outcome more so. What is very silly is concluding what I posted even remotely suggested that they could be more powerful if they didn't spar???

Are you suggesting then that someone who doesn't spar is more capable of hitting what they're aiming for than someone who does? Or maybe that someone who is training to hit your face, abdomen, liver, thigh, knee, or other "legal" targets will be less able to hit another target than someone who doesn't spar? Because, again, that sounds kind of silly.

No where did I remotely suggest that hitting to "restricted" targets would hinder hitting other targets. It is very silly to jump to such illogical conclusions. Your thought process is faulty.

Isn't this counter to your last point, which is that sparring is too restrictive.

When I said "high risk" techniques, it referred to moves that leave you very vulnerable should you miss and those that have a low probability of landing. The risk-reward ratio is not there. This can be overlooked more in sparring - could be deadly in actual combat. Again, you have misinterpreted my post.

Okay, which is more likely to succeed, the guy who trains for a three minute fight and has to fight for one, or the guy who trains for a one minute fight but has to fight for three?

Endurance training methods were not my point. I agree that it's better to train for the worst, but my point was simply to state that one's mind set and strategy would be different in these two cases. In an actual street fight, the MAIN strategy should be to end it ASAP. Once again, your response is a non sequitor.

the real question then is, even if we agree on this, how does not learning to fight help with this?

What????
I've never seen a response so wrong on so many points. Either you are purposely misreading, or are looking at it with (perhaps) a sub-conscious distorted filter, or just being difficult. If none of these, please read future posts slower and with a clear mind.

 

[Steve]

In amateur boxing, the power of the punch does not affect the scoring, as in point karate competition. A hit is a hit. Full contact professional fighters are in a separate class where power does affect the outcome more so. What is very silly is concluding what I posted even remotely suggested that they could be more powerful if they didn't spar???

No where did I remotely suggest that hitting to "restricted" targets would hinder hitting other targets. It is very silly to jump to such illogical conclusions. Your thought process is faulty.

When I said "high risk" techniques, it referred to moves that leave you very vulnerable should you miss and those that have a low probability of landing. The risk-reward ratio is not there. This can be overlooked more in sparring - could be deadly in actual combat. Again, you have misinterpreted my post.

Endurance training methods were not my point. I agree that it's better to train for the worst, but my point was simply to state that one's mind set and strategy would be different in these two cases. In an actual street fight, the MAIN strategy should be to end it ASAP. Once again, your response is a non sequitor.

What????

I've never seen a response so wrong on so many points. Either you are purposely misreading, or are looking at it with (perhaps) a sub-conscious distorted filter, or just being difficult. If none of these, please read future posts slower and with a clear mind.

Rolling my eyes.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

Rolling my eyes.

I was tagged for that for some reason, this is the post that shows when i click "quoted your post".

If you add role play you also add another dimension of silliness.

How so? You roleplay an event to assess how well you do it in, this is well established everywhere and even in martial arts.

Definition:
"act out or perform the part of a person or character, for example as a technique in training or psychotherapy."

You are technically doing it in many more areas than i cited.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

@Dirty Dog I think your site glitched, i dont see steve quoting my reply yet i have a alert that says he did, nor do i see the edit marker. Begs the question if isshinryu would get a quote alert for this or not.

Just in case @isshinryuronin Steve quoted you above.

 

[Steve]

Okay. Now that I have access to a keyboard, I'll try and connect the dots for you.

In amateur boxing, the power of the punch does not affect the scoring, as in point karate competition. A hit is a hit. Full contact professional fighters are in a separate class where power does affect the outcome more so. What is very silly is concluding what I posted even remotely suggested that they could be more powerful if they didn't spar???

Full contact professionals spar. Seriously. This isn't rocket science. You said:

1. In sparring, the goal is generally to score, not to inflict bodily damage.
2. Thus, the power and depth of penetration will not be as great.

I asked the question whether full contact fighters.. even amateurs (though why you think that matters is beyond me), are not training to deliver strikes with power and depth of penetration? The answer is yes, they do. They spar, and they are able to deliver strikes with power and depth of penetration.

Whether folks who do not spare can do the same is not clear.

No where did I remotely suggest that hitting to "restricted" targets would hinder hitting other targets. It is very silly to jump to such illogical conclusions. Your thought process is faulty.

You said:

3. Sparring has restricted targets and techniques. Real fight, anything goes, no safety net.

So, are you now saying that restricted targets and techniques is not a problem? Fine. I agree. Makes it strange that you brought it up, though.

When I said "high risk" techniques, it referred to moves that leave you very vulnerable should you miss and those that have a low probability of landing. The risk-reward ratio is not there. This can be overlooked more in sparring - could be deadly in actual combat. Again, you have misinterpreted my post.

You said:

4. Sparring can use more "high risk" techniques as the danger factor is less. Street fighting is no place for fancy techniques or tricky tactics.

There are two ways to interpret this. It's either two completely unrelated statements, making me wonder why you included them both in the same bullet. Or you are suggesting that the former precludes the latter (i.e., that being skilled using techniques you consider "high risk" based on whatever arbitrary criteria you have is a disadvantage in a street fight.) Does that help?

Endurance training methods were not my point. I agree that it's better to train for the worst, but my point was simply to state that one's mind set and strategy would be different in these two cases. In an actual street fight, the MAIN strategy should be to end it ASAP. Once again, your response is a non sequitor.

You said:

5. A match may last 3 minutes or more. A real fight will likely be over in 1, so maximum damage in the minimum amount of time is the strategy. End it ASAP before the X factor bites you in the rear.

Again, context matters and you say two things. Both that a match lasts 3 minutes or longer, and that a "real fight" will "likely be over in 1." This is 100% an endurance statement, and given that you are literally pulling these two statements out of your rear end, my recommendation would be to train for a fight that lasts an hour, so that if it only lasts a minute you won't gas out.

Also, i realize I might have given you a new vocabulary word (non sequitur). While I fully support your excitement to use it in conversation, I suggest you look it up to learn what it actually means before using it again.

What????

I've never seen a response so wrong on so many points. Either you are purposely misreading, or are looking at it with (perhaps) a sub-conscious distorted filter, or just being difficult. If none of these, please read future posts slower and with a clear mind.

You said:

6. You enter a sparring match fully prepared, expecting, to fight. And while you should have good situational awareness when walking at night, even occasionally visualizing possible scenarios as you do so, when it actually happens it's still a surprise requiring an immediate ramp-up.

All these factors combine to require a different mind set for the two activities. The possibility of severe damage or death is a game changer. As drop bear notes, there can be high stress instances in sparring, but nothing like the real thing.

To sum it all up, the deep-seated, in your primal gut, intent to cause severe bodily harm by any means possible is something no sport can replicate. Even heavily padded full power drills (they can get close and give the best simulation to the real thing) are not the real thing.

Beware of seeing these two things as very similar to each other.

And so the question is, how does not learning to fight help? You seem to have a very martial idea of self defense, but you discount the benefits of actually learning to fight. It really doesn't make much sense.

Either you are purposely misreading, or are looking at it with (perhaps) a sub-conscious distorted filter, or just being difficult. If none of these, please read future posts slower and with a clear mind.

I really, really recommend you take your own advice. And perhaps do a quick google search for common logical fallacies so you use the terms correctly.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There are two ways to interpret this. It's either two completely unrelated statements, making me wonder why you included them both in the same bullet. Or you are suggesting that the former precludes the latter (i.e., that being skilled using techniques you consider "high risk" based on whatever arbitrary criteria you have is a disadvantage in a street fight.) Does that help?

I think I get what he was at on this one. The best analogy is hitting for home runs - it has a high risk (of strikeout) and high reward in the ruleset. So in competition there may be techniques that present enough reward (chance to win) to offset the risk (of losing). Where the risk is increased (risk of being beaten into serious injury), that reward (still a chance to "win" the encounter) may not be sufficient.

If I tried, I could probably come up with some examples, but I'm not convinced the issue is a major one. If you train only for competition (especially if only for a single ruleset), you're likely to develop some gaps that leave risky openings. In most cases, I don't think those openings change the math of an encounter with someone with little or no training.

 

[KungfukennyG]

Hello to whom ever it may concern. Here is the deal : I am having a real ***** of a time 'finding' out WHERE in heck I might find and pay for what I would be inclined to refer to as 'immersion' training for lethal self defense...and I mean absolutely Lethal. And I don't mean 'martial art', I mean more along the lines of 'get it done and kill the guy who is trying to kill YOU' type instruction. I am not a big man, and am not young anymore either. But---I have been lifting wieghts for my entire---life. AND, I am a former pro-mountain biker, so though I am 'thin' and small boned, I'm fairly tough, have built in strength from all my years of athletics, and very good endurance. I don't mind if I have to shell out 5 grand to access an immersion course --so long as it is the REAL DEAL. But I'll be damned if I can't find ANYONE....ANY WHERE who has ANY clue about 'where' I might find such a course. They all just keep trying to point me in the direction of entering into some form of martial art, and I am NOT interested in 'that' approach. More like mastering a brutal and effective use of the basic boot knife, and or, in conjunction with a hand gun, and or even a wooden club or club and knife. ..Just...somebody...does ANY one have clue here about what I am looking for...??? I want to become 'capable' of quickly killing someone who is trying to KILL ME as the way I see it, I don't think that 'reality' as we know it is going to be as 'nice' and 'peaceful' as we are all accustomed to and take for granted for all that much longer, it's just a 'gut' feeling. ..I hope I am wrong of course, but I am adamant to make sure I am one of the people who is damned well READY and RIPE in case the **** hits the fan....so to speak. ...Anyone??? And please, don't offer any stupid or wise-crack advice. I'm not in the mood for *** hats. Just someone who might think they know what I might be talking about. I am in the Pacific Northwest, so it would of course be nice if I didn't have to 'fly' to a place....as I do--not--fly anymore thanks to all the *** hats liberal politicized virus horseshit agend etc etc add nausium....

Anyhow, thanks in advance to ANY one who has even a scant TRACE of bona fide, relevant input for me.

...

Wow, someone with this attitude needs therapy a lot more than martial arts. An angry, obviously unhappy person looking to learn how to kill. I'm glad I'm just an ***hat with nearly 50 years of martial arts training who never thinks about killing anyone.

 

[Gyakuto]

You are lucky enough to have Ameri-do-te in the US. Somebody should point the OP in Master Ken’s direction…stamp the groin…

 

[Jeffm]

Hello to whom ever it may concern. Here is the deal : I am having a real ***** of a time 'finding' out WHERE in heck I might find and pay for what I would be inclined to refer to as 'immersion' training for lethal self defense...and I mean absolutely Lethal. And I don't mean 'martial art', I mean more along the lines of 'get it done and kill the guy who is trying to kill YOU' type instruction. I am not a big man, and am not young anymore either. But---I have been lifting wieghts for my entire---life. AND, I am a former pro-mountain biker, so though I am 'thin' and small boned, I'm fairly tough, have built in strength from all my years of athletics, and very good endurance. I don't mind if I have to shell out 5 grand to access an immersion course --so long as it is the REAL DEAL. But I'll be damned if I can't find ANYONE....ANY WHERE who has ANY clue about 'where' I might find such a course. They all just keep trying to point me in the direction of entering into some form of martial art, and I am NOT interested in 'that' approach. More like mastering a brutal and effective use of the basic boot knife, and or, in conjunction with a hand gun, and or even a wooden club or club and knife. ..Just...somebody...does ANY one have clue here about what I am looking for...??? I want to become 'capable' of quickly killing someone who is trying to KILL ME as the way I see it, I don't think that 'reality' as we know it is going to be as 'nice' and 'peaceful' as we are all accustomed to and take for granted for all that much longer, it's just a 'gut' feeling. ..I hope I am wrong of course, but I am adamant to make sure I am one of the people who is damned well READY and RIPE in case the **** hits the fan....so to speak. ...Anyone??? And please, don't offer any stupid or wise-crack advice. I'm not in the mood for *** hats. Just someone who might think they know what I might be talking about. I am in the Pacific Northwest, so it would of course be nice if I didn't have to 'fly' to a place....as I do--not--fly anymore thanks to all the *** hats liberal politicized virus horseshit agend etc etc add nausium....

Anyhow, thanks in advance to ANY one who has even a scant TRACE of bona fide, relevant input for me.

...

What you find in yourself is going to merge with your training. So as far as being given lethal training you may wish to look at martial art vs martial law in application. Remember, we are just jelly fish on land with bones. After training somewhere though you may look back and revisit the issue brought forward.

 

[Steve]

I think I get what he was at on this one. The best analogy is hitting for home runs - it has a high risk (of strikeout) and high reward in the ruleset. So in competition there may be techniques that present enough reward (chance to win) to offset the risk (of losing). Where the risk is increased (risk of being beaten into serious injury), that reward (still a chance to "win" the encounter) may not be sufficient.

So, in this case, we should never, ever see a walk off home run win, because by this logic, the risk/reward is too great. One should only ever hit for contact and try to get on base. And the logic of the statement would also suggest that a person who hits for power will be unable to change his tactics should the situation warrant. In other words, a slugger will never be able to bunt when the situation calls for it.

But we do see walk off home runs, and you know what? They're always hit by people who are skilled at hitting home runs, people who practice hitting for power.

If I tried, I could probably come up with some examples, but I'm not convinced the issue is a major one. If you train only for competition (especially if only for a single ruleset), you're likely to develop some gaps that leave risky openings. In most cases, I don't think those openings change the math of an encounter with someone with little or no training.

Training only for competition is not the same thing. And it also doesn't answer the question of what then fills that gap? If not competition then what? This is that self defense hokum I mentioned in another thread... this idea that the absence of something magically creates something else that is better. I could say that I don't eat meat because it causes cancer. Okay, fine... we could debate that assertion, but whether true or not, it doesn't answer the question, what do I eat in lieu of meat? I haven't said anything about what I do eat. This is how self defense discussions tend to go. A lot of talk about what not to do, but never an answer of what they do that is "better."

 

[Rick Abel]

Hello to whom ever it may concern. Here is the deal : I am having a real ***** of a time 'finding' out WHERE in heck I might find and pay for what I would be inclined to refer to as 'immersion' training for lethal self defense...and I mean absolutely Lethal. And I don't mean 'martial art', I mean more along the lines of 'get it done and kill the guy who is trying to kill YOU' type instruction. I am not a big man, and am not young anymore either. But---I have been lifting wieghts for my entire---life. AND, I am a former pro-mountain biker, so though I am 'thin' and small boned, I'm fairly tough, have built in strength from all my years of athletics, and very good endurance. I don't mind if I have to shell out 5 grand to access an immersion course --so long as it is the REAL DEAL. But I'll be damned if I can't find ANYONE....ANY WHERE who has ANY clue about 'where' I might find such a course. They all just keep trying to point me in the direction of entering into some form of martial art, and I am NOT interested in 'that' approach. More like mastering a brutal and effective use of the basic boot knife, and or, in conjunction with a hand gun, and or even a wooden club or club and knife. ..Just...somebody...does ANY one have clue here about what I am looking for...??? I want to become 'capable' of quickly killing someone who is trying to KILL ME as the way I see it, I don't think that 'reality' as we know it is going to be as 'nice' and 'peaceful' as we are all accustomed to and take for granted for all that much longer, it's just a 'gut' feeling. ..I hope I am wrong of course, but I am adamant to make sure I am one of the people who is damned well READY and RIPE in case the **** hits the fan....so to speak. ...Anyone??? And please, don't offer any stupid or wise-crack advice. I'm not in the mood for *** hats. Just someone who might think they know what I might be talking about. I am in the Pacific Northwest, so it would of course be nice if I didn't have to 'fly' to a place....as I do--not--fly anymore thanks to all the *** hats liberal politicized virus horseshit agend etc etc add nausium....

Anyhow, thanks in advance to ANY one who has even a scant TRACE of bona fide, relevant input for me.

...

Firearms Training | Combat Shooting & Tactics | United States

Combat Shooting & Tactics reputation has grown as our alumni go on to become competent professionals in the field. Through engaging and hands-on educational opportunities, Combat Shooting & Tactics continuously cultivates future tactical leaders.

www.combatshootingandtactics.com

 

[Fightingiseasy]

Hello to whom ever it may concern. Here is the deal : I am having a real ***** of a time 'finding' out WHERE in heck I might find and pay for what I would be inclined to refer to as 'immersion' training for lethal self defense...and I mean absolutely Lethal. And I don't mean 'martial art', I mean more along the lines of 'get it done and kill the guy who is trying to kill YOU' type instruction. I am not a big man, and am not young anymore either. But---I have been lifting wieghts for my entire---life. AND, I am a former pro-mountain biker, so though I am 'thin' and small boned, I'm fairly tough, have built in strength from all my years of athletics, and very good endurance. I don't mind if I have to shell out 5 grand to access an immersion course --so long as it is the REAL DEAL. But I'll be damned if I can't find ANYONE....ANY WHERE who has ANY clue about 'where' I might find such a course. They all just keep trying to point me in the direction of entering into some form of martial art, and I am NOT interested in 'that' approach. More like mastering a brutal and effective use of the basic boot knife, and or, in conjunction with a hand gun, and or even a wooden club or club and knife. ..Just...somebody...does ANY one have clue here about what I am looking for...??? I want to become 'capable' of quickly killing someone who is trying to KILL ME as the way I see it, I don't think that 'reality' as we know it is going to be as 'nice' and 'peaceful' as we are all accustomed to and take for granted for all that much longer, it's just a 'gut' feeling. ..I hope I am wrong of course, but I am adamant to make sure I am one of the people who is damned well READY and RIPE in case the **** hits the fan....so to speak. ...Anyone??? And please, don't offer any stupid or wise-crack advice. I'm not in the mood for *** hats. Just someone who might think they know what I might be talking about. I am in the Pacific Northwest, so it would of course be nice if I didn't have to 'fly' to a place....as I do--not--fly anymore thanks to all the *** hats liberal politicized virus horseshit agend etc etc add nausium....

Anyhow, thanks in advance to ANY one who has even a scant TRACE of bona fide, relevant input for me.

...

Sounds like you need to join the army man. That’s real life or death training. But honestly if you look hard enough there are grimy mma places and gyms that will beat the tar off you to toughen you up.

 

[crshieh]

I've never trained with him, but I would take a look at Adam Chan in Canada. He teaches "martial arts wing chun", but he also has more practical methods teaching "at home" when he takes off the martial arts hat.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So, in this case, we should never, ever see a walk off home run win, because by this logic, the risk/reward is too great. One should only ever hit for contact and try to get on base. And the logic of the statement would also suggest that a person who hits for power will be unable to change his tactics should the situation warrant. In other words, a slugger will never be able to bunt when the situation calls for it.

But we do see walk off home runs, and you know what? They're always hit by people who are skilled at hitting home runs, people who practice hitting for power.

I think his point was that sport does reward these risky plays (like hitting for home runs). So we should expect to see walk-off home runs, even though the attempt comes with an elevated risk of strikeout vs. what we might call "technical hitting" where the attempt is to get the ball in play with the lowest chance of strikeout and greatest chance of getting to base.

Training only for competition is not the same thing.

Agreed. That was my point. And even then, I think the risk is minimal with rulesets that don't reward risky stuff overly much. So somebody training for MMA competition - even if they train exclusively for competition - is probably not developing any problematic high-risk habits.

I even suspect that home run hitter might have an advantage over me in a fight, if we both have bats. Ow.