Pressure testing self-defence techniques

[Flying Crane]

lol, maybe you could suggest better ways to express and define WHY ballet kicks Tracy Kempo's bottom?

Well, I would probably do a whole lot of academic research and then write a dissertation complete with footnotes and pompous, academic sounding quotes from original sources and it would be incredibly dry reading that would put you to sleep on any anxiety ridden night when you are tossing and turning and unable to fall asleep due to the pressures of your job and life in general. Eventually I could turn it into an actual Doctoral dissertation and get all kinds of academic credit and get it published and establish myself as a Martial Academic, outstanding in my field.

Ok, I'm being rediculous, I know.

The problem with using a graph like this is that it makes assumptions that few people will agree upon. For example, you put aikido and Chi Sau on the low end of the scale which implies they are not very effective at preparing you for an encounter. First off, I doubt any Aikidokas or Wing Chun players would agree that their art is such a poor approach. From my own experience, I have met Aikidokas who would be very formidable opponents. Having studied Wing Chun I know some players who use Chi Sau extensively to develop their skills and I would have to go home and change my underwear at the mere thought of facing off against them because they are FIERCE.

You placed Muay Thai higher on the scale, but keep in mind that it is a sport as well as a martial art. The art focuses on techniques that work well under the rules of the sport, such as in a ring, wearing gloves, no real grappling, no weapons, etc. While I believe Muay Thai has a lot to offer that would translate well into a street situation, it carries no guarantee.

The thing is, all systems have tools and approaches that are designed to prepare the practitioner for combat. Not everything works equally well for everyone, but that doesn't mean they are ultimately ineffective. In the right hands, they are all devastating. Trying to place them on a graph is an attempt to assign them a measurable "value", and I just think this is ultimately impossible. You may have your own opinions about what "value" certain styles or training methods have, but that is about the time when you meet someone who trains that way and you find out they can kick your *** in their sleep.

 

[Flying Crane]

I
Until you are up against someone that potentially is going to kill you, you simply have no idea how you will respond.

BINGO!!

Sometimes people ask me "what would you do if I attacked you with XYZ?" I could give a laundry list of possible techniques designed to defend against that particular attack, but the real answer is "I have absolutely no idea". Until the attack happens and I have to actually deal with it, I don't know what I will do. Hopefully my training will serve me well and I have some general approaches that I would probably follow, but ultimately I have no idea until it happens, and I think that anyone who tells you differently is either lying or fooling themselves.

 

[MJS]

BINGO!!

Sometimes people ask me "what would you do if I attacked you with XYZ?" I could give a laundry list of possible techniques designed to defend against that particular attack, but the real answer is "I have absolutely no idea". Until the attack happens and I have to actually deal with it, I don't know what I will do. Hopefully my training will serve me well and I have some general approaches that I would probably follow, but ultimately I have no idea until it happens, and I think that anyone who tells you differently is either lying or fooling themselves.

Exactly! And that is/should be, the ultimate goal that we all should srtive to acheive...to be able to react without having to stand there and think what we're going to be doing.

Mike

 

[MJS]

First off, I want to say that I believe in "pressure testing" ones SD material. I think that it is imperative. A real, live, resisting opponent will give you feedback on how to make a technique actually work on the street.

Is every technique able to be directly tested in this fashion? Obviously not. However, there always exists some measureable adaptation that a creative instructor will make in order to make testing said technique safer.

Will this reduce the amout of "reality" in the practice? Yes. But this is better then just practicing against human models who do nothing.

The key to this type of training is safety. The proper modifications and safety precautions always have to be made in order to make sure that everyone involved walks away healthy (and hopefully happy). Training without these precautions is dangerous, ill-conceived, immature, and ultimately makes the instructor liable for damages.

One of my pet peeves is when e-warriors get on the soapbox and start spouting how they fight full contact with no pads and how this is the only worthwhile training and that all training in every single technique should be like that. For one thing, that mentality is a load of garbage, because of what I said above. For another, I know for a fact that it is BS. I've got enough injuries from not being safe to know that if I kept it up, I would no longer be training. People who claim this are, to put it simply, lying. They are trying to show off and make other people feel smaller for whatever god aweful reason.

Train hard and be safe. That's the bottom line. One's overblown sense of machismo is not worth a debilitating injury or even your life.

upnorthkyosa

ps - wow, that turned into a rant! :asian:

Very well said! I was going to post a little more, but IMO, this pretty much sums up what I was going to say.

Mike

 

[kickcatcher]

the ultimate goal that we all should srtive to acheive...to be able to react without having to stand there and think what we're going to be doing.

How would a sensible person train this attribute? - by doing kata or by pressure testing? (serious non-bashing comment)

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Practice. Lots and lots of practice.

 

[MJS]

How would a sensible person train this attribute? - by doing kata or by pressure testing? (serious non-bashing comment)

I never said anything about kata, so I'm guessing you are just using this as an example? As for your question. As I stated, pressure testing is an important area to include in ones training. I've said this in many of my past posts. However, this area, being able to react without thinking about our moves, can also be trained without having someone gear up in the redman suit. I've ran and taken part in line drills where you will have one person, the defender, line up facing his attackers. They'll throw half to three quarter speed random attacks.

We need to keep in mind, as its been already said, there are some areas that can't be trained. How can I pressure test a knee break, arm break or neck break? Secondly, I have a job that I need to go to. Our bodies can only take so much, so speaking for me only here, I really don't need to put myself through a daily full contact fight.

IMHO, we should really be concerned with our training individually. If someone else does not want or does not feel the need to do this sort of training, that is really up to them. I've realized that there comes a time when constantly talking about the way everybody should train, pushing this and that on people really gets to be :deadhorse

 

[Xue Sheng]

How would a sensible person train this attribute? - by doing kata or by pressure testing? (serious non-bashing comment)

Please see next quote

Practice. Lots and lots of practice.

I agree.

I believe it is that you have to practice something about 2000 time before it becomes habit.

 

[Flying Crane]

How would a sensible person train this attribute? - by doing kata or by pressure testing? (serious non-bashing comment)

It is not "either-or". Both methods, as well as other not named here, can contribute to the skill development.

Many people claim kata practice is not realistic and doesn't develop one's combat skills. But I believe kata practice has its place within the bigger picture. Kata develops the basic techniques of a system's curriculum. By practicing kata correctly (many people practice it incorrectly, or without an understanding of the kata), one develops strong and clean technique. However, this must be accompanied with drills and exercises designed to develop the ability to realistically use and apply the techniques found within the kata. This means drilling with partners, as realistically as possible while minding safety for those involved, to develop useage.

Some arts do not include kata. Does this put them at a disadvantage in my opinion? No, there are clearly other methods that can also develop quality skills. My point is, don't ignore kata as a useful training method. If done correctly, kata practice can be a powerful tool.

 

[SAVAGE]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAVAGE
To really pressure test something, you can only do it by fighting..I mean real fighting... to the death

To the death????

Yeah....did you not understand that...wasnt it clear to you! Its what I said let me see:

To really pressure test something, you can only do it by fighting..I mean real fighting... to the death [/I]

Yeah its pretty clear to me!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAVAGE
(most TMA were tested under these conditions i.e wars etc).

Like Karate was ever used on battlefields, or Judo...

Goju Ryu Karate was taught to Japanese Military personell during WW2...GEKISAI DAI CHI and GEKI SAI DAI NI were created during this time period! HKD has been taught to the militaries around the world...true arts like Judo and BJJ are sports and I doubt that SUMO was tested in the battle fields.

Now I am going to point out a very important part of my post...I said MOST.....(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ look the word up)......martial arts were tested in the battle fields...not ALL!

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Well, some people think that the UFC is "real fighting", y'know?

 

[Cryozombie]

Now Bob, cmon. Everyone knows that practicing an MMA is the only way to ever win a fight.

Thats why for hundreds of years, up until the 1990's at somepoint...

Eveyone lost.


​

 

[shesulsa]

If whole arts can be messured by the chart it would only be because of the training activities in them. The chart cites examples such as "MMA sparring" but ultimately that's an ACTIVITY not an art.

Just out of curiosity, would you say that ballet and Tracy kempo are equals as self-defence training systems?

But you CAN'T measure arts this way because quality training is not just about the art - it is 90% WHO IS TEACHING IT. And you're linking martial arts and self-defense and actually self-defense is an application of martial arts - only one application, and not even of a handful of martial arts.

To paraphrase, if I may, what my teacher said tonight - Brazillian jujutsu, MMA, alive training ... it's all been done before and rehashed, made pretty and sold as something else under different names or with another nice adjective in front of it. It's New Coke, Pepsi Free, Red Bull. Same ****, different package.

Alive training for self defense is good, but it has to be worked up into - we've rehashed this here before - you don't bring in a class full of noobs and tell them if they don't block your punch they're gonna get hit. That is irresponsible teaching.

Curious - where'd you get the graph?

 

[Xue Sheng]

kickcatcher

I suppose I should have asked this question prior to my last post.

What data did you use to produce this chart and how was that data collected?

Also what controls were used?

Xue

 

[Phil Elmore]

The chart, while very nicely rendered, is not intellectually supportable. It attempts to quantify factors that are entirely subjective and imposes on the question the author's prejudices in judging other systems and methodologies. It is an attempt to render in "official" presentation the author's own preferences.

There's nothing wrong with graphically representing your preferences, but you cannot then present them as objective evaluations. Couching them in some sort of quasi-mathematical context only exacerbates this misrepresentation.

 

[Rich Parsons]

There is a school of thought within the self-defence community (“RBSD” although that label is fast becoming a stigma as somewhat unrealistic people join the bandwagon), that the training which best prepares you for real life situations is that which is closest to it. This school of thought acknowledges that whatever training you do, it is often going to be a step-up to the real thing. I say “often” because ‘reality’ is itself an imprecise and variable factor. The goal therefore is to make the step-up as small as possible.

So we need ways of comparing our training options with “reality” in order to assess the benefit we are getting and what we can do to get closer to “reality”.

One model, my own in fact, plots training activities against two variables:
1. The contact level
2. The scope (“bandwidth”) or resistance you face

For practical reasons “reality” is plotted as notionally unrestricting in both scope and contact. Obviously this is not always the case, but it is best not to underestimate it.

The graph ends up looking something like this:

You can plot virtually any martial arts training activity on the graph to assess its value.

Honestly confused here.

Are you tryting to rate the value of an art in this chart for self defense?

I know some MMA guys who cannot handle themselves on the street, and would be dead as the opponents three bodies with either stomp him to death or stab him or shoot him.

While you have kata which is not an art per se, hence part of my confusion teaches techniques that later can be used by people. Now while I personally do not like kata for myself, and will not argue it as the best, I do see it as part of a learning tool.

As to common sense, I do not see MMA comps working multiple opponents not handling small circle joint locks or breaks (* most are not allowed *), nor are they checking or dealing with hand held weapons.

While I agree that playing and working to randomize something improves your self-defense I am confused by the usage and placement of the styles of competing on this chart.

I know some boxers that are great. And can defend themselves, while others could not.

I knew a street fighter he knew two techniques. parry or drop the opponents hand when the are not looking and hit them and break their nose before the altercation is known to have begun by both sides.

While I have talked to a guy a trained a person to do well in a MMA comp and as soon as their was a crowd the guy was dumb struck he could not handle the confusion and input. He did fine one on one.

So, what I am asking is there a qualification on this? Or is it so common sense that everyone knows it is not the art or the competition, but the person who will make the difference?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I like the part about the opponents three bodies.
The fearsome Voldemort style I believe?

Seriously though, the graphing makes numerous assumptions, many of them false. There are kata that are multiple person, contain contact and resistance.
It places "Actual Self Defense" at the peak point of possibility. Where would actual combat fall on this chart? Real street fighting?

Why is kata ranked the lowest?
Why is chi-sao ranked so low? Chi-sao is constant contact, as it's a sensitivity drill.

The graph is pretty, but without solid data to back the placement of each point, is just a collection of dots.

 

[Adept]

Seriously though, the graphing makes numerous assumptions, many of them false. There are kata that are multiple person, contain contact and resistance.
It places "Actual Self Defense" at the peak point of possibility. Where would actual combat fall on this chart? Real street fighting?

Why is kata ranked the lowest?
Why is chi-sao ranked so low? Chi-sao is constant contact, as it's a sensitivity drill.

The graph is pretty, but without solid data to back the placement of each point, is just a collection of dots.

I'm not going to argue with most of the positions as they are plotted. Except perhaps, I don't think MMA comps have a significantly higher level of contact than Muay Thai or Boxing comps.

Kata isn't ranked the lowest. As a rule, kata allows zero deviation from the list of tehcniques that make up the pattern, and have no contact. Their place at the bottom left is justified in that respect.

I have no experience with Tomiki Aikido comps, so I don't feel qualified to comment. Chi-sao is low contact. While you are in constant contact with the opponent, you don't come out of it battered, bruised and bleeding like you do from a boxing match. And it is limited. You can't kick your partner in the shins, or punch them, or use elbows or knees, or anything like that. It's not the purpose of the drill.

I'm pretty happy where the various activities listed have been placed on the chart.

The crunch comes when we try and extrapolate what an activities position on this chart translates to. When we try and make conclusions based on this chart.

 

[Flying Crane]

Chi-sao is low contact. While you are in constant contact with the opponent, you don't come out of it battered, bruised and bleeding like you do from a boxing match. And it is limited. You can't kick your partner in the shins, or punch them, or use elbows or knees, or anything like that. It's not the purpose of the drill.

Sounds to me like you have no experience with Chi Sao.

While it is true, Chi Sao is an exercise designed to build sensitivity, it also is designed to develop reaction ability and technique useage. It is not "true combat" or "free sparring", but it is a drill that approximates that within reasonable limits.

Chi sao can be done gently, or fiercely with high contact, and you can certainly get beaten up black and blue doing it. It can include elbows, knees, and kicks as well as hand strikes and trapping. And these strikes can certainly be landed. It depends on the level to which the players wish to take it.

Your assessment of Chi Sao is absolutely wrong.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Sounds to me like you have no experience with Chi Sao.

While it is true, Chi Sao is an exercise designed to build sensitivity, it also is designed to develop reaction ability and technique useage. It is not "true combat" or "free sparring", but it is a drill that approximates that within reasonable limits.

Chi sao can be done gently, or fiercely with high contact, and you can certainly get beaten up black and blue doing it. It can include elbows, knees, and kicks as well as hand strikes and trapping. And these strikes can certainly be landed. It depends on the level to which the players wish to take it.

Your assessment of Chi Sao is absolutely wrong.

Now that you mention it, I do know someone that is a student of the younger son of Yip Mann and I once did Chi Sao with him, well to be more correct he did Chi Sao I did push hands and I got thumped in the chest pretty hard a couple of times and I wouldn't exactly call it low impact.