So laying your weapon on the floor so that your attacker can pick it up and use it against you is preferable to handing the weapon back to your attacker so he can use it against you?
Real World Attacks
- Thread starter Earl Weiss
- Start date
So laying your weapon on the floor so that your attacker can pick it up and use it against you is preferable to handing the weapon back to your attacker so he can use it against you?
So you are using a LEO example and the LEO training failure in a self defense situation to argue that "not all arts are meant for SD", that many "have sole or strong sport elements such as Judo, BJJ and TKD" and "they do great in sport venues"? If anything, your example goes to the ineffectiveness of "self defense" training even for LEOs, and has nothing to do with "sport".
Also the discussion is about the first attack, which Peyton Quinn says is a poke to the chest, or push, which is then followed by a right hand punch. I think there is some miscommunication going on here and everyone is focusing on the right hand punch and not the things that precede it, which is by the way, the actual topic of discussion.
good point.
d1jinx
Master Black Belt
Daniel Sullivan said:
This is exactly why I stopped posting here on MT. There are those who only wish to point out how everyone else is the wrong way, and they are the only true light.
well, i say, let them believe what they want. continue to believe what they believe, and let them have their Internet Dojo.
I shall leave this place for the trolls and talk to you guys and gals in the troll free zone.
I also noticed that many of the other good quality posters have stopped posting as well.
this used to have a lot of help and information.... now its a waste of time.
And the skills and attitudes (continuous full contact striking) developed through such training is easily adapted to a self defense situation, that peyton quinn says this is the essential element lacking in so called traditional self defense training, which involves teaching movements through solo forms, working on antiquated "secret hidden moves" with little or no contact against a willing cooperative partner, and teaching students to walk away from a confrontation at all costs.
Good point.
miguksaram
Master of Arts
And once again we have hit dejapoopoo with yet another thread.
d1jinx
Master Black Belt
some have chosen to stop coming here. and NOT because of whom you speak of.
andyjeffries
Senior Master
Our of interest, everyone seems to be talking about this Peyton Quinn chap (who I'd never heard of until last time his name was brought up on this board). Has anyone actually asked him about WTF Taekwondo Sparring and whether he feels the lessons match up with his beliefs of best practices?
Can anyone recommend his "best" book for someone who's never heard of him so I can get started?
No sir, you've missed the point. Arts that were designed specifically for sport, or have a strong sport element, were designed for an artificial environment. This isn't a snipe, I'm presenting fact. As an example, these sports or sport elements conduct their training/competition in a venue where there is one opponent. The opponent is not armed. The opponent has agreed to the same rules as you. You may have a time out or time in between rounds. The venue is well lit, flat, dry and depending on the sport, it may be padded or the participants may wear protective clothing/equipment. Thus training for this venue differs as there are not as many possible variables that exist in which to confront a participant.
Now take this to a real world SD altercation. None of the above may or will apply regardless of L.E.O. or private citizen. The training will differ. And because it differs, training for sport may actually be a detriment in a real altercation since we react under stress and revert to our training. Again, this isn't a snipe at sport training, rather it is illustrating the difference. The examples I (and others) cited above happened decades ago and SD training has advance exponentially as a result.
As an example, BJJ has a lot of ground work. A lot of it is great, and a lot of it only has sport applications and do not translate well over to SD. This is why Royce Gracie had to change many elements of BJJ for the use of officers. Taking someone down and putting them in a triangle, komora or cross-body mount is great for the ring but can be a very bad choice in the street due to a plethora of circumstances. TKD if trained as far as many kicks/little handwork can also be great in a specific venue but a really bad choice in a real altercation. Again...NO snipe, just looking at it realistically. Being a great kicker in competition is great. But lets look at this honestly, the kicker is warmed up, in loose fitting clothing, on a flat, dry surface in a well lit area and the opponent is the same. Translate this to being confronted/attacked between a couple of parked cars, or on a stairwell, or in an elevator or other enclosed area, or a sloping/slick/wet surface and the person is not warmed up/stretched out and in a dress or jeans. Things become very difficult, very quickly.
Now, if someone is training solely for sport or exercise or social interaction then there is no real need to worry about it. As noted more than once, by many posters here, the problem comes up when one methodology claims to be good for another venue. It is NOT an 'us vs. you' situation. At least it shouldn't be and isn't on my part. It is serious dialogue on a serious topic that all of us should thoughtfully consider. If one trains for SD, or if one trains for sport but would like to put SD elements into the training then they should look seriously at what those in SD teach and why. Learn from mistakes so they aren't repeated. It would be silly for me to teach sport without getting a good grasp of what is required in that venue. Conversely, it would be silly for a sport instructor to teach SD without getting a good grasp of what SD requires.
We should all be here for each other and assist each other if it is within our power to do so. Many of us are 'masters' and as such, we should conduct ourselves accordingly for the benefit of our students. If a school is sport-only and the students are fine with that, great. If on the other hand a sport school wanted to put in some SD and wanted information on goods ways to do so....ask. I'm here for them to the best of my ability. I think other SD folks here would feel the same way.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Perhaps that is because that is the outline for the thread: From the first post: " I also want to limit it to the first overt physical act. We could spend volumes on the precursers."
I did not want to get side tracked by the things that precede it. Not a bad discussion, but I think best done seperately since it would likely consume many "Pages".
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
I would reccomend both books. They are quick reads. One of his favorite comments is "I don't teach Martial Arts."
My last KKW instructor ended weapon take away drills by having both participants take a couple of steps back, bow, and then the partners changed rolls, so there was no giving back of the weapon; it changed hands from attacker to defender. The defender became the attacker and then the weapon went from him to the now-defender during the course of the drill. Whoever the last defender was would then put the weapon back in its proper place at the conclusion of its usage in drills.
While I understand where Earl's instructor was coming from, where does it end? As you point out, Puunui, putting it on the ground simply substitutes one bad habit for another that isn't quite as bad. But what then? Do you practice cutting your opponent's throat before concluding the drill? Do you eliminate any dojo etiquette, as that would be non existent in a violent encounter? Does the sensei walk around like some kind of bad evil MA master and strike anyone who turns around in the back of the head with a shinai while shouting, "Never turn your back on an enemy!!"
Every training environment will, by necessity, have protocols that one should not observe outside of that environment. The bouncer letting go of a tapping drunk being a fine example. Practicing lethal techniques in a way that makes them not lethal, which is a necessity, could potentially cause the technique to fail in a real life scenario. So you can either not practice them at all, or bring in death row inmates so that you can follow through and determine if you 'killed him right.' Since that would be illegal and raise serious moral and ethical questions, and since not training them at all defeats the purpose of knowing them, you end up with having to practice them in a way that will not kill your training partner.
We can go on and on. The studio and the tournament will never have a one to one correlation to real world street violence. It doesn't matter how common the attack your art is most effective against is; it is always the one you aren't ready for that will get you anyway.
Yeah, but you used an LEO training failure example as the lead in for your point, which to me speaks more to the fact that even "non-sport" self defense training for LEO is not the be all and end all for self defense. The LEO example has nothing to do with sport, unless it involved some sort of shooting contest, which I don't think it did.
The point is valid sir, under duress we revert to our training. I doesn't matter if the training is with a firearm, a knife, a stick, a punch, a kick, grappling etc. This is what I'm stressing in regards to the topic of real world attacks.
And it needs to be stressed that there is no be-all-to-end-all training from any venue. Some is better than others. Some has a better statistical effectiveness in altercations. The better point would include that training, in any form, should always seek to better itself and avoid repeated mistakes. Surely you'll agree that it is the same with sport training. As better training comes in, it modifies or replaces that which was before it for a more effective competitor. This is a good thing. Good for the student, and good for the art.
And when those who are trained using the modern competition training methods, they revert to their training which is continuous full contact blows when in striking distance. The other arts that utilize such training are boxing, judo, kyokushin karate, and BJJ/MMA, all sports, and all very effective for self defense purposes.
I'm sorry to hear this. There are still many people that still come to this site, and for this reason staff here at MT still try to make it a rewarding experience. Comments like your's makes you no better then the ones you condemn.
Don't take this as me picking on you Glenn, or picking apart your post. My intention is purely to point out things that perhaps aren't as effective as one may assume on the surface. Modern competitive training methods i.e. continuous full contact can have some benefit. But we need to be very careful here as it also has many things that make it not the best choice in many circumstances. Let's take a look at full contact, as well as boxing. In training a competitor/boxer wears protection such as hand tape, gloves and a mouth piece. What is the reason? To protect the hands from injury and/or being cut. Herein lies the issue, you (generic you) won't have these items in a real world attack. The chance of injuring the hands, particularly when striking the face/head is substantial. Anyone that has broken a knuckle, sprained a wrist, cracked a metacarpal etc knows that in addition to being painful, it can interfere with otherwise simple tasks i.e. using a cell phone to call for help, utilize car keys to initiate an escape (or to unlock a door), manipulate an improvised or concealed weapon etc. Damage to the hands may reduce the use of the hand to effect escape, further defend against attack or assist another. Furthermore, if the hand is cut, for example by punching someone in the mouth or other area of the head (which bleeds pretty readily) we now have to be concerned with blood-born pathogens. This is a real concern, particularly these days with the use of intravenous drugs, poor living conditions etc. I cannot emphasis this enough! Therefore boxing or continuous strikes to the head with unprotected hands is not the best of possible options.
I've already touched on BJJ/MMA. Judo is great. But does teach the use of heavy clothing for many of the techniques. Put the person in a T-shirt or no shirt and many techniques go out the window. This is not to suggest that these sports are useless in a real fight. However, there are some real considerations that need to be addressed if we're going to get the most out of it from a SD perspective. And there are much better choices available.
