Regular Sparring Sessions is a Go

[Transk53]

No, but it's a different strategy, and likely one that's going to take time away from training on things that are more likely to occur in his world. This is one of those areas where prep for competition has a significant difference from prep for dealing with an out-of-control person.

Yeah, absolutely.

 

[Juany118]

No, but it's a different strategy, and likely one that's going to take time away from training on things that are more likely to occur in his world. This is one of those areas where prep for competition has a significant difference from prep for dealing with an out-of-control person.

Exactly. The dynamics of the encounters simply result in you ending up all in at the gate. The officer can be initiating it to end an assault or take someone into custody. The bad guy doing an all out assault to make sure the officer can't access tools is another time you can run into a person who has some skill training. In either case the bad guy is also going all in because they want it over ASAP so they can flee before other officers arrive and they have no chance. The other general circumstance doesn't involve someone capable of skill but they are also incapable of self control so they are all in...High/intoxicated people or those suffering from a mental illness.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Exactly. The dynamics of the encounters simply result in you ending up all in at the gate. The officer can be initiating it to end an assault or take someone into custody. The bad guy doing an all out assault to make sure the officer can't access tools is another time you can run into a person who has some skill training. In either case the bad guy is also going all in because they want it over ASAP so they can flee before other officers arrive and they have no chance. The other general circumstance doesn't involve someone capable of skill but they are also incapable of self control so they are all in...High/intoxicated people or those suffering from a mental illness.

The "all-in" aspect changes the dynamics considerably. When I teach, I often don't warn students of what I'm about to demonstrate on them, because their knowledge will force a change in my approach. If I tell someone to stop me from doing what I want (take them down), that's different than them trying to do what they want (hit me). In a competition, there's a split focus on doing those two things (that's how you win). An attacker, while not giving you your way, is essentially focused on their attack. It is their primary means of stopping you from doing what you want (in your case, you accessing your tools will likely be in their head). This brings new opportunities.

 

[drop bear]

No, but it's a different strategy, and likely one that's going to take time away from training on things that are more likely to occur in his world. This is one of those areas where prep for competition has a significant difference from prep for dealing with an out-of-control person.

I haven't found this. I have seen some pretty classy strikers win street fights going backwards as much as they do going forwards.

3 dimentional fighting is the idea here. Where you can move through a lot of ranges well.

It is precisely what I mean when I bang on about better basics. The ability to fight through a range of environments by having the ability to solve problems rather than trying to predict which environment you will be engaged in and set up a system for that.

This is one of the skills sparring aims to teach.

Otherwise If I go all in in training I will wind up getting knocked out. Which sucks.

 

[drop bear]

Your definition of "hard" pretty well matches mine, JGW. I think of "soft" as anything that doesn't clash force-on-force or use mostly strength to execute a takedown (the latter is more subjective).

I dont make the distinction. I just do stuff.

 

[Juany118]

I haven't found this. I have seen some pretty classy strikers win street fights going backwards as much as they do going forwards.

3 dimentional fighting is the idea here. Where you can move through a lot of ranges well.

It is precisely what I mean when I bang on about better basics. The ability to fight through a range of environments by having the ability to solve problems rather than trying to predict which environment you will be engaged in and set up a system for that.

This is one of the skills sparring aims to teach.

Otherwise If I go all in in training I will wind up getting knocked out. Which sucks.

What @gpseymour and I are talking about though is an undisputed legal requirement I have to deal with and so train to deal with.

A competitive fighter has unfettered access to all three dimensions a police officer, in the US, doesn't. They need to not just say "they won" but be able to objectively justify the force they used to win. That means, if I am going to take a guy into custody by simply beating him down via striking I need to be able to justify why I didn't use control methods.

Additionally striking while backing up is rarely an option. 99% of the time a sane and sober subject is fighting me, even fighting me HARD, they are doing it to create an avenue of escape. A striking fight while backing up provides them with that avenue of escape which I am charged to prevent and unless I am told the rules of engagement forbid it I spar like I will fight at work.

 

[drop bear]

What @gpseymour and I are talking about though is an undisputed legal requirement I have to deal with and so train to deal with.

A competitive fighter has unfettered access to all three dimensions a police officer, in the US, doesn't. They need to not just say "they won" but be able to objectively justify the force they used to win. That means, if I am going to take a guy into custody by simply beating him down via striking I need to be able to justify why I didn't use control methods.

Additionally striking while backing up is rarely an option. 99% of the time a sane and sober subject is fighting me, even fighting me HARD, they are doing it to create an avenue of escape. A striking fight while backing up provides them with that avenue of escape which I am charged to prevent and unless I am told the rules of engagement forbid it I spar like I will fight at work.

Yeah. but that is why police work is less related to self defence than a lot of other environments.

And you get a tazer.

For the rest of us. Three dimensions is a pretty handy skill to have.

 

[Juany118]

Yeah. but that is why police work is less related to self defence than a lot of other environments.

And you get a tazer.

For the rest of us. Three dimensions is a pretty handy skill to have.

First tasers are far from infallible of the times I have deployed them they have failed 30 % of the time.

-A simple baggy sweat shirt making it so the probes never got close enough to effect, until we went hands on and dump him so he was lying on them with his body weight.
-the guy who just reached up and ripped the wires out of the taser.
-The guy who in his struggle against the voltage tore one of the delicate wires making it purely pain compliance that can be fought through are just three examples.

That aside 2 things. The two of us were talking about how if you are training for a purpose your training needs to reflect it. Competition, self defense, law enforcement whatever.

Also I would argue backing up striking isn't going to work for self defense. The person doing a street assault, robbery, rape whatever, isn't going to be doing the probing strikes, dancing in and out where backwards striking really comes into its own. They are going to "all in".

This isn't an indictment of competition training btw. Such training can be awesome for self defense because you learn to take a hit. However you need to keep in mind, and do some training, with a very focused self defense mind set, verses a competition mindset. The same techniques work for both but the strategy and tactics are different.

 

[drop bear]

First tasers are far from infallible of the times I have deployed them they have failed 30 % of the time.

-A simple baggy sweat shirt making it so the probes never got close enough to effect, until we went hands on and dump him so he was lying on them with his body weight.
-the guy who just reached up and ripped the wires out of the taser.
-The guy who in his struggle against the voltage tore one of the delicate wires making it purely pain compliance that can be fought through are just three examples.

That aside 2 things. The two of us were talking about how if you are training for a purpose your training needs to reflect it. Competition, self defense, law enforcement whatever.

Also I would argue backing up striking isn't going to work for self defense. The person doing a street assault, robbery, rape whatever, isn't going to be doing the probing strikes, dancing in and out where backwards striking really comes into its own. They are going to "all in".

This isn't an indictment of competition training btw. Such training can be awesome for self defense because you learn to take a hit. However you need to keep in mind, and do some training, with a very focused self defense mind set, verses a competition mindset. The same techniques work for both but the strategy and tactics are different.

Yours is a police mindset not a self defense one.

The people you face have one or two pre determined tactics due to the context in which you work.

Now the context in which i worked the tactics and context was much more diverse. So the training i sought out needed to reflect that.

Street assaults and robberies i have encountered absolutely engaged in probing attacks. Which of course wont work if the other guy can just shoot you.

This isnt an indictment on police focused training they do a wonderful job.However you need to keep in mind, and do some training, with a very focused self defense mind set, verses a law enforcement mindset. The same techniques work for both but the strategy and tactics are different.

 

[Juany118]

Yours is a police mindset not a self defense one.

The people you face have one or two pre determined tactics due to the context in which you work.

Now the context in which i worked the tactics and context was much more diverse. So the training i sought out needed to reflect that.

Street assaults and robberies i have encountered absolutely engaged in probing attacks. Which of course wont work if the other guy can just shoot you.

This isnt an indictment on police focused training they do a wonderful job.However you need to keep in mind, and do some training, with a very focused self defense mind set, verses a law enforcement mindset. The same techniques work for both but the strategy and tactics are different.

The ones I have investigated didn't. They start with posturing and threats sure, especially the robberies, but if the suspect feels you called their bluff it's all in for the bad guy. Not only do they want your stuff but you "disrespected them" so they are doubly pissed.

One clarification, with assaults I do not mean "fights" say at a bar over some imagined slight, girl whatever. I mean the "Bob pissed me off earlier and I am lying in wait, or stalking him, to kick his ***" kinda assaults. Hell we have freaking middle school students who do that, no lie, and it's not an exaggeration. On the flip side we also have "fights" where people agree to meet someone where. That is still technically an assault and fits your experience but it's not what I mean.

Now I also work in a town with a per capita crime rate equal to cities like Philadelphia and Chicago. The County DA actually ponied up the money for us to have CCTV cameras all over town because it is basically wild westesque at this point. That kind of system is almost unheard of in the US, though there are pushes to make it more common. The only reason our homicide rate isn't crazy high is because they can't shoot, thank God. I won't assume however that the nature of street crime here is universal outside the US, but my experience is consistent other US Officers. This article explains a bit about it in terms of the dynamics. Violent Crime: The US and Abroad - Criminal Justice Degree Hub

What makes it bad is that even though we have had steady declines in violence since the 1990s crack "boom" we are still basically the most violent nation per capita in the Developed West.

 

[KangTsai]

No, but it's a different strategy, and likely one that's going to take time away from training on things that are more likely to occur in his world. This is one of those areas where prep for competition has a significant difference from prep for dealing with an out-of-control person.

Not really. It's the same strategy alright, but this time my opponent is just way worse. Against the average John, all you really need to do is cut out the complex things from your arsenal and go back to the first few techniques. Armed assaults are a different story.

 

[KangTsai]

My point was to say there is is not "one" type of WC, any more than there is one type of Karate, Jujutsu etc. The idea the "old mate" is getting across is that...
1. if you go in like that you need to somehow jam up the initial attack and shut it down while
2. making sure your "jam" covers you from the inevitable follow up from the other hand.

There are a multitude of ways to do it, and he mentions others he doesn't demonstrate. The main point I was doing was just trying to illustrate what I personally mean when I refer to "jamming", which is to tie up (and hopefully) set up one arm,while still covering the inevitable other hand which is coming. Initially some thought I meant going straight for a take down rather than simply entering for either striking or takedowns/controls. That was the point of the video.

If you aren't confident you can jam the "first" you don't go in like that. If you can jam the first but NOT while protecting your noodle from the other hand you also don't do it. The guy in your video hesitated more times than I could count and then went straight in like a shmoo when he bothered to go in over and over again regardless of success. To me that didn't even say anything about his style of WC but rather his training method... no pressure testing.

I think we will both agree that if he pressure tested during his training and got his bell rung a few times then (like we both do) he never would have done something so gosh darn silly. Or at least I hope so.

You know that old saying you walk in you are a black belt. Then you get punched in the face and you become a white belt. Wing chun guy was taken apart. He was never going to apply any principles regardless whether it was angles or straight lines. And was always going to look like a chump.

Just what happens when you get outclassed. His one method got shot down with that first left hook. And from there his only method was to repeat his failed approach.

Just the joy of sparring sometimes.

I dont have an issue with old mates method. I cant really use it because it is too complicated but i can see the idea.
It is the one tactic approach that will get you unstuck.

The thing is that, I knew for the most part what I was going to receive against me in sparring. The whole range of punches and kicks. So even though I had never done proper full-contact prior, I didn't get absolutely destroyed like in the video.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I haven't found this. I have seen some pretty classy strikers win street fights going backwards as much as they do going forwards.

3 dimentional fighting is the idea here. Where you can move through a lot of ranges well.

It is precisely what I mean when I bang on about better basics. The ability to fight through a range of environments by having the ability to solve problems rather than trying to predict which environment you will be engaged in and set up a system for that.

This is one of the skills sparring aims to teach.

Otherwise If I go all in in training I will wind up getting knocked out. Which sucks.

You're reading my point backwards. I'm not saying a competitive fighter can't handle someone going all-in. I'm saying it's easier in some ways to handle the all-in guy. He's less in control, and in some ways more predictable. Someone who is pissed off at me will give me far more openings than you would if we were sparring.

My point was that there are things that are necessary when training for competition that aren't as necessary for a defensive situation. In effect, it's like if I trained to defend against a sword. Those defensive skills may be useful in defending against a stick, but I'll be training to an unnecessary standard: sticks don't cut.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I dont make the distinction. I just do stuff.

And I didn't refer to you making any distinction.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not really. It's the same strategy alright, but this time my opponent is just way worse. Against the average John, all you really need to do is cut out the complex things from your arsenal and go back to the first few techniques. Armed assaults are a different story.

Actually, that's my point. There's a level of complexity necessary when training for a skilled and controlled opponent (competition). That doesn't apply the same way for self-defense training. And part of what I can use for self-defense is easily limited by someone who is both skilled and willing to be patient and wait until late in the round for a good opening.

 

[drop bear]

And I didn't refer to you making any distinction.

Yeah i know

 

[drop bear]

You're reading my point backwards. I'm not saying a competitive fighter can't handle someone going all-in. I'm saying it's easier in some ways to handle the all-in guy. He's less in control, and in some ways more predictable. Someone who is pissed off at me will give me far more openings than you would if we were sparring.

My point was that there are things that are necessary when training for competition that aren't as necessary for a defensive situation. In effect, it's like if I trained to defend against a sword. Those defensive skills may be useful in defending against a stick, but I'll be training to an unnecessary standard: sticks don't cut.

Training for more than one style of attack is pretty important.

What if they attack you wrong?

Who raised competition by the way?

Because i don't think i did.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Training for more than one style of attack is pretty important.

What if they attack you wrong?

Who raised competition by the way?

Because i don't think i did.

I referred to competition because that's where one is most likely to meet a quality fighter and actually have to fight them.

And what do you mean by "attack you wrong"? I never said I train for only one kind of attack. We've been over this before, and you seem to forget the points we've covered in the past.

 

[drop bear]

I referred to competition because that's where one is most likely to meet a quality fighter and actually have to fight them.

And what do you mean by "attack you wrong"? I never said I train for only one kind of attack. We've been over this before, and you seem to forget the points we've covered in the past.

Self defense that only incorporates the all in attack?

 

[drop bear]

The ones I have investigated didn't. They start with posturing and threats sure, especially the robberies, but if the suspect feels you called their bluff it's all in for the bad guy. Not only do they want your stuff but you "disrespected them" so they are doubly pissed.

One clarification, with assaults I do not mean "fights" say at a bar over some imagined slight, girl whatever. I mean the "Bob pissed me off earlier and I am lying in wait, or stalking him, to kick his ***" kinda assaults. Hell we have freaking middle school students who do that, no lie, and it's not an exaggeration. On the flip side we also have "fights" where people agree to meet someone where. That is still technically an assault and fits your experience but it's not what I mean.

Now I also work in a town with a per capita crime rate equal to cities like Philadelphia and Chicago. The County DA actually ponied up the money for us to have CCTV cameras all over town because it is basically wild westesque at this point. That kind of system is almost unheard of in the US, though there are pushes to make it more common. The only reason our homicide rate isn't crazy high is because they can't shoot, thank God. I won't assume however that the nature of street crime here is universal outside the US, but my experience is consistent other US Officers. This article explains a bit about it in terms of the dynamics. Violent Crime: The US and Abroad - Criminal Justice Degree Hub

What makes it bad is that even though we have had steady declines in violence since the 1990s crack "boom" we are still basically the most violent nation per capita in the Developed West.

Which is fine. But it is still you suggesting that the violent encounters you experience follow a specific script.

Ant that was explained by you as due to your nature as a police officer.

That is not my experience. My experience is that violence can be unpredictable in nature.

And violent assaults of any kind can't be dismissed because people do the same in middle school. That is silly. People die from violent assaults.