SD kicks to the head

[exile]

I think it's a really bad idea for us to "armchair quarterback" this & this guy's choice of techniques in the situation he faced on that night. For him, it's what came to mind & it happened to work in his favor. Anymore than a run vs. a pass that got over the goal line "worked."

I don't think anyone is criticizing the guy's moves, Ice—I mean, you can't argue with success, eh?—but Dame Fortune was definitely smiling on him that day!

All we can really say is, "glad it worked out for him." He was faced with a situation where he had to either use his training or possibly get hurt & he walked away unhurt. Let's hope that if we are ever in that situation, we can do the same.

... and hope that we're as lucky as he was!

The bottom line problem is that we just don't know what's going to happen when we're in a dangerous situation and we do something. Tiny things beyond our control can make all the difference in the world, no matter how good we are. At one point, you just have to choose what to do and do it, and hope that, as with this guy, your number isn't up...

 

[FearlessFreep]

I would agree but the OP said that TKD in general was effective and I was pointing out that it was if you train that way. Remember in TKD some school does not teach any SD at all so there way of kicking for point would be worthless on the street. But I do agree with your above statement it goes for all Arts.

One thing I try to keep in mind is something I believe

All things being equal, strength wins
All things being equal, speed wins
All things being equal, size wins
All things being equal, technique wins
All things being equal, conditioning wins
All things being equal, determination wins
All things being equal, training wins
All things being equal, experience wins
Things are never equal

(I came up with that myself so it just makes sense to me, but if anyone disagrees, I'll listen)

But anyway, point is that I feel that the idea of SD is not a continuum, it's many dimensional. All the factors come to play and you hope you have more positives then your opponent. Any serious athlete from *any* sport is going to have advantages in stamina, maybe strength, and speed, than a non-athlete, but any brawler is going to have advantages in practical experience then they guy who trains pure SD but has no real world exposure. So who wins? Depends on how it all stacks up on that day.

Like in football, the offense has rushing, and passing, and offensive line on the rush and offensive line on the pass. The defense has pass rush and run defense and secondary. Each of the components has aspects of speed, size, and game plan. So who wins the game? Well, that's why they play it, to see whose combinations of positives wins out over the negatives.

So training TKD for self-defense is more effective along certain lines than training TKD for sport. But training TKD for sport is more effective along certain lines than not training at all, but getting in street fights is more effective along certain lines than no direct experience.

So I guess my thinking is that even badminton can be effective. They have stamina and speed and when your best self-defense move is to run like heck, that's pretty effective. Maybe not as effective in all scenarios, better than nothing

 

[FearlessFreep]

but Dame Fortune was definitely smiling on him that day!

He was three on one and one of the three had a gun. He was pretty darn lucky to escape un-injured no matter *what* his response. What is the correct high percentage response to facing three opponents, one or more of which are armed? I mean other than hoping your life insurance is paid up for the sake of your survivors

I think at issue is the fact that the news description is not an analysis of martial arts technique, it's just a news article for normal people. They guy obviously had some skill so I'm willing to grant that maybe he had a really good reason for what he did. Maybe the kick to the face followed another technique that brought the opponents face down which the article does not describe? Maybe he noticed a certain amount of nervousness and thought that something as impacting as a kick to the face would have an emotional result as well? Maybe it was a move he practiced a lot so he had more confidence, or more of an automatic reaction, thane another technique that would've been higher-percentage but in which he had less confidence/experience? , I dunno, it's a news article not a training demo. I'd actually be really curious to ask him his thought process and motivations

 

[exile]

I'd actually be really curious to ask him his thought process and motivations

That's what I always wonder about. He may have decided that there was too great a risk of getting shot even if he cooperated and might as well go for broke, given the chances. You really do wonder about what it was in the situation that prompted him to act.

One thing we can say for sure: he had the skill to kick high and carry it off. That's something definitely worth developing, even if in most situations lower kicks are lower-risk. But it's not really possible to draw any general conclusions from a single example—we don't know how many times other people have tried to do the same thing and had it go badly sideways on them. The only thing you can say for sure is that this guy has used up a lot of whatever good luck was assigned him at birth...

 

[newGuy12]

So training TKD for self-defense is more effective along certain lines than training TKD for sport. But training TKD for sport is more effective along certain lines than not training at all,

Okay, then, someone else said what I was thinking. I have a buddy who USED to be a boxer. He was in "golden gloves" competitions and was successful to some extent. Now, he never trained for self defense. Never.

But, this guy can punch, HARD, no joke. And from a boxer's position of course. SD training or NOT, this guy can take his licks and give them out too! So, you see, in this way, he makes himself more able to defend than if he had never trained!

 

[newGuy12]

That's what I always wonder about. He may have decided that there was too great a risk of getting shot even if he cooperated and might as well go for broke, given the chances. You really do wonder about what it was in the situation that prompted him to act.

Wouldn't it be interesting to know more? Was he an exceptionally tall man, and the attacker an exceptionally short woman?

Was he in "perfect kicking range"? Did he do this without too much forethought, but more as just what he trained? I just wish we had more information.

And, yes, I suspect strongly that the thought occurred, "SHE IS GOING TO TO SHOOT ME NOW!!!"

 

[newGuy12]

Did he lean far after grabbing the gun hand (or gun), and in so doing, choose the head to "end it", since his torso was off vertical line?

Many questions arise, I think.

 

[exile]

Wouldn't it be interesting to know more? Was he an exceptionally tall man, and the attacker an exceptionally short woman?

Was he in "perfect kicking range"? Did he do this without too much forethought, but more as just what he trained? I just wish we had more information.

And, yes, I suspect strongly that the thought occurred, "SHE IS GOING TO TO SHOOT ME NOW!!!"

Did he lean far after grabbing the gun hand (or gun), and in so doing, choose the head to "end it", since his torso was off vertical line?

Many questions arise, I think.

That's the thing... it's hard to know what to think (apart from, 'I'm glad it wasn't me in a position where I had to make that kind of decision') without knowing more about the specifics. The devil is in the details, they say, and they is right!

 

[Tito]

I guess I read the article wrong >>. I was caught up in the whole "Edy is a girl" comment, and thought the kicker was a woman...

 

[Kacey]

Like so many other things that occur in MA training, pure athleticism (as demonstrated by high kicking, or jump kicking, or doing full splits, etc.) is not, on the surface, directly related to self-defense - BUT increased athletic ability, as shown by general fitness, endurance, flexibility, balance, and strength, CAN help in self-defense, because you will have more options than someone with the same technical knowledge and less physical ability. That is the purpose of training techniques and skills that seem to be superficially unrelated to actual self-defense situations. That doesn't mean that all techniques are appropriate for all situations, or for all people - but you should all know that already.

 

[jim777]

Another point to consider is that the article might simply be incorrect from a TKD point of view What if the 'kick to the head' was an outer crescent to the back of the trigger hand, and sent the gun flying? I suppose it was the kicker who told the police what happened (difficult to imagine otherwise), and the reporter who read the nightly/daily police blotter may have decided outer crescent was less 'reader friendly' than 'kick to the head'. I mean, it's just one of those wacky karate Bruce Lee moves, who's going to know one way or the other, right? If you don't know Martial Arts, you dumb it down to where it becomes interesting reading for your readers, I suppose is the gist of what I'm saying (I feel like that wooden armed and legged fisherman in Family Guy now :lol: ).

jim

 

[MJS]

Another point to consider is that the article might simply be incorrect from a TKD point of view What if the 'kick to the head' was an outer crescent to the back of the trigger hand, and sent the gun flying? I suppose it was the kicker who told the police what happened (difficult to imagine otherwise), and the reporter who read the nightly/daily police blotter may have decided outer crescent was less 'reader friendly' than 'kick to the head'. I mean, it's just one of those wacky karate Bruce Lee moves, who's going to know one way or the other, right? If you don't know Martial Arts, you dumb it down to where it becomes interesting reading for your readers, I suppose is the gist of what I'm saying (I feel like that wooden armed and legged fisherman in Family Guy now :lol: ).

jim

I'll preface this with saying that I do not study TKD, but from a realistic standpoint, do you feel that its really the best option to attempt a kick against a gun or knife? I mean, we see Chuck Norris do it all the time, but thats the movies, where the bad guy always gets caught and the good guy always walks away.

 

[jim777]

Personally, I think the best idea would be to put up your hands either immediately before or after handing over your wallet. :lol:
But I certainly know BBs who could overpower you in the wink of an eye with any number of strikes or kicks. It depends on the person being robbed, and the person robbing, and their mental and physical abilities.

I was really only saying that as Martial Artists, when we see something inthe news like "kick to the head" we immediately go over all of our high kicks in our heads and wonder which one was used (hook, front snap, jumping this or spinning that, etc), but if the reporter doesn't study martial arts then almost any move could be called a "kick to the head" in a story to make it more readable. Maybe a quick knifehand or hammerfist strike to the back of the hand to send the gun flying preceded a front snap to the face, for example, before the MA'ist ran off...Anything could have happened.

 

[YoungMan]

I also think your average person, especially a newspaper reporter who is used to getting the facts, would know the difference between a kick to the head and any other technique.
They may not know exactly what kick was used (i.e. name of the kick) but they'd most likely know what a kick to the head looks like versus a kick to the hand or strike to the back of the neck.
Give them a little credit.

 

[jim777]

I also think your average person, especially a newspaper reporter who is used to getting the facts, would know the difference between a kick to the head and any other technique.
They may not know exactly what kick was used (i.e. name of the kick) but they'd most likely know what a kick to the head looks like versus a kick to the hand or strike to the back of the neck.
Give them a little credit.

In my opinion you are looking at this incorrectly sir. How exactly would a reporter know what the kick looked like from reading about this nearly non-event in a police blotter? Reporters don't jump out of bed in the middle of the night to cover "few were involved, no one was injured, no one was caught" stories, and the report certainly would have mentioned that it was an eye witness acount had any reporter been present. The whole story is second hand at best. That was my point