So what's a better "test" for martial arts other than MMA?

[Juany118]

I do more stuff like this, lots of wrist and armlocks into takedowns.

Just for context here are some are some Kali methods to address a knife.

On the second video the instruction starts at 1:40.

To illustrate the point who is better than "Lucky Dog", of the notorious 'Dog Brothers", being willing to take a hit from a shock knife

lesson? secure that damn arm and try to get to the outside and/or get such dominate control of that arm so while you are dealing with that knife arm the bad guy is so concerned about you getting his knife the free arm doesn't come to do something nasty. If you do that with proper control you can strip it using his body, doing trauma to the his limb or using your own body, the ground, a door jam, it really don't matter but you can strip it.

 

[RTKDCMB]

But i didn't get stabbed. So it is a proven method.

Yes, being lucky is a proven method of not getting stabbed.

And maby every one dirty dog subdued was incompetent.

Or the person who attacked you was incompetent?

 

[RTKDCMB]

And that is one of the many excellent ways to disarm a knife.

I wouldn't go that far.

 

[Juany118]

I wouldn't go that far.

I posted that one because I know some people have some major respect for Gracies and BJJ. The issue I have with that may be the one you have, you need to use footwork. you may be forced to stop the knife in the middle but that is an "oh crap" moment. You need to get to the outside while you are dealing with the knife, not stop then move, otherwise they can still try to use weight and leverage to get you one way of the other with that blade.

 

[Steve]

Or the person who attacked you was incompetent?

exactly. I think you have it!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I realize most of us agree the best test of fighting ability is to actually fight someone. I'm referring to mma competition and various rule sets as the best mode of testing empty hand fighting ability and it seems that view gets a lot of push back. You guys keep bringing up physical limitations of practitioners, weapons, deadly joint destructions, situational awareness, feeling, and things that either can't be reasonably tested or don't pertain to fighting ability. We are talking about a reproduceable method to test fighting ability. Right now mma is the best we have. I realize fighting ability is only one component of self defense but I think it is important for those that choose to be able to test their fighting ability and those that claim proficiency in fighting should be able to prove this in some manner. Some schools and friends I know have different alive drills that are more removed from mma competition that still assess the same skills mma does but these are isolated instances and not widely available. What we need are standardized methods (like mma competitive ruleset) that test fighting ability from entry level to high level.

If we had to pick just one, yes, something like MMA is among the best. I don't think a single test is the best test. Using multiple methods of testing what you do is better, because each type of testing will have to make some compromises, and you can choose them to overlap and cover most of those compromises.

 

[drop bear]

First I agree that grappling arts are used heavily in warfare. Where you thought I didn't is beyond me. I kept mentioning Jujutsu and specifically mentioned HEMA grappling already. I am talking technique as you described it. As an example Judo is actually born of Jujutsu (created by Kanō Jigorō) and retains techniques that can be used to address the knife. You do indeed use grappling to address the knife but the accepted method isn't to try and get inside the guys guard, take him down and beat him. It can involve taking him down but it involves doing so by taking control of the limb controlling the knife and you don't start beating him until you have stripped him of the weapon. This includes the training in the most modern combative systems such as Krav Maga, MCMAP, SOCP etc, not just older arts like Judo, Jujutsu, BJJ, HEMA and FMA (which has a lot of grappling, especially in terms of disarming techniques),etc.

I actually mentioned HEMA grappling earlier, because while I don't technically study it I regularly discuss and am going to start sparring with a friend of mine who does compete in HEMA with the Longpoint. We think it will be interesting to see how HEMA and FMA mesh on the floor. In particular we have spent a lot of time talking about grappling and disarms and while specific techniques are different the concept, control the limb controlling the weapon and strip, is the same. This became a specific point of conversation because when we started talking about it neither of us were aware how much grappling was involved in the other's system.

Now maybe you meant this (control then strip), but the way you described it makes it sound like you are trying to get inside his guard, without controlling the weapon limb, taking him down and beating him, again without controlling the weapon limb. If my read was accurate then that is simply a bad idea all around and all the other systems seem to agree, including the Gracies.

If I didn't read correctly please explain the technique you used to take the subject down and why you think it's a good idea to not strip the knife and just beat him?


Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Yeah just picked him up and dumped him. I could tell you why that works. And why it has worked for the 50,000 years it has been used on the battlefield.

There are a whole bunch of real world circumstances that you have not factored in.

But i dont have to. Because it works on the street against real knives. And i know because i have done it.

The sword throw. Did not strip the weapon though. Plenty of anti knife throws dont strip the weapon.

 

[drop bear]

exactly. I think you have it!

Backflips.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Lol, there is just no winning at this. We spar hard we are doing too hard. We spar light it is not real enough, we do a sport, it's a sport and not really self defense.

The moral of the story is you do you and not care what others think. Just care about what is working.

Actually, I think that's his point.

Okay, I won't speak for Steve. It's my point. Anything that plays for safety is too safe. Anything that doesn't is too dangerous (and actually becomes the dangerous situations we train to avoid). The best we can do is pick what fits us, while being purposeful about watching for the flaws in whatever we use for testing ourselves.

I train with compliant drills, because those make it easy to learn techniques (I've never met anyone in an organized MA system who didn't use them at some level). But those don't test, except at the most technical level. I spar and practice randori, because that lets me see where the weaknesses in my offense and defense are. But those are kept very safe and last longish periods of time, so they don't simulate an actual altercation very well. I use simulated attacks (more force, sometimes with practice weapons, sometimes with exact instructions to the "attacker" to create a specific situation to defend) because those let me work at higher speeds on attacks I'll never otherwise receive from someone I train with. Even putting those together, there are gaps, so I build in other exercises to fill those gaps.

Those using MMA competition as their testing platform have a good start. If they want to test their skills for self-defense, they will benefit from adding some other types of skill testing to overlap some of the areas where MMA isn't as strong.

 

[drop bear]

Judo's has blade disarms. You don't simply grab them and hit them until they 'give up" the knife in Judo.

Not really.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The start of the situation was due to my working as a bouncer in my mis-spent youth, however it was definitely a fight. And no, you cannot simply stack up mats to recreate it. Go to an apartment complex, get a student (or a teacher) and one of you stand about 1/3 of the way up, the other 2/3, and face each other up/down the stairs..... think about what you rather conclusorily posted, then come back and re-evaluate it would be my suggestion.

I never said you were wrong in your approach. I said I'd rather have use of my hands, and not depend upon my legs (you may want to know that I have crappy knees, so would be reluctant to use a kick on that surface, leaving me with no attacking limbs until they get close enough for me to use my hands on their head). I stand by that. It's my preference to have that control. YMMV

As for using the stacked mats as a simulation, sure I can. It's not a perfect replication, but it does provide a useful space to work in, where injuries are less likely.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The advantage of sports is the large pool of experienced practitioners, this brings crowds which bring money which brings research and investment into making a practitioner the strongest he can be. Those who don't compete at an elite level can still greatly benefit and learn from those that do.

Of this, only the large pool of opponents applies to the usefulness as a test of personal effectiveness. The rest still benefits even those who don't compete, at all, as much as it benefits the low-level competitor.

 

[Ironbear24]

Not really.

Well gee I guess my Judo instruction was wrong then. They showed me to remove the knife and break the wrist and control the limbs. I guess they are all idiots and all I needed to do was grab them and punch them until they drop it. I mean, it's not like they can easily stab me while I grabbed them .

 

[Gerry Seymour]

But i have still used MMA to defend knives.

And i get that this might be an irritating response.

But it is also still the benchmark for self defense effectivness. So it is valid.

I mean validation of a method because i fought a guy once is defended to the death here.

And seriously if we are discussing improv weapons. I am constantly wrestling bottles and glasses off people.

This goes to my point that training for MMA is, in fact, useful for self-defense. I would suggest, though, that you may have a different result than some from MMA, specifically because of your work. I see this difference in NGA. Though we focus on self-defense, some folks come in who do not. They tend to get into technical training and don't really react to a training knife as if it were a knife (not caring if they grab it by the blade, for instance). Because of your work, you're probably looking at your MMA training differently. We (adults) learn partly based upon the intent and importance we place upon the learning.

Your existing training worked, and would be better (for SD) if it included specifically training principles around weapons. One key principle I work with is keeping the knife away. Seems obvious, except that we treat every punch as if that hand might contain a knife. No "taking a punch" to get in. No wrapping an arm up against yourself to restrain it, if that would allow an un-noticed knife to have dangerous access. It's not just training a few techniques (actually, we don't train any techniques only for the knife - we train how to use them differently should you know there's a knife there). The primary part of knife defense, for me, is how it changes all of your other training, to give you a better chance of surviving the knife you didn't see.

 

[Ironbear24]

I prefer the methods I was shown compared the gracie video there simply because If I miss that, I am dead. If I miss some of the other methods at least I can evade and wait for another opportunity.

 

[Juany118]

Not really.

Then I suggest you restudy how any competent Judo instructor will tell you how to deal with a knife.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

But i didn't get stabbed. So it is a proven method.

Whole self defense systems are built on this idea.

I know of no self-defense system built on a single instance of something working. I know of none built on a half-dozen instances.

Now, if you're referring to continuing validation, yeah. There are techniques ans principles that only get occasional real-world validation, and we have to take that for what it's worth. Best if there's some extra attempt made at validation besides that.

 

[Juany118]

Yeah just picked him up and dumped him. I could tell you why that works. And why it has worked for the 50,000 years it has been used on the battlefield.

There are a whole bunch of real world circumstances that you have not factored in.

But i dont have to. Because it works on the street against real knives. And i know because i have done it.

The sword throw. Did not strip the weapon though. Plenty of anti knife throws dont strip the weapon.

Then as others said, he was incompetent or as I said he actually was trying to bully/bluff you and had no intent to use the knife.

Why because it DIDN'T work on the battlefield, this is a fact. Jujutsu (and Judo) Pankration, HEMA grappling, FMA etc... They ALL have the grappler taking control of the blade wielding limb to disarm. Why because they are arts forged on the battlefield know this.

You keep saying "battlefield" ignoring what the battlefield arts actually teach in knife/blade defense. They all teach you take control of the arm wielding the blade, each and everyone of them. Show me one that doesn't since I have shown you three (Jujutsu, Judo, HEMA and FMA). Until then please stop with the battlefield line...your turn to actually produce something beyond your one off experience with nothing to back up the fiat "battlefield" line that is contradicted by the doctrines of the battlefield arts you keep mentioning because they all say "if you are unarmed and the opponent armed, control the armed limb and o disarm" and this is a bonafide fact.

Your entire argument ignores what battlefield grappling arts actually train so you can say "I grappled, it worked once..." Either via dumb luck or an incompetent opponent "...so my training works. Or else you say the battlefield grappling arts you keep referencing are dead wrong.

As an example, the video you posted. The person who took down the opponent was isolating the opponent's sword with his own sword. Your video proved my point, not yours but I tried to be nice. You need to isolate that weapon first and that means, when unarmed, isolating the limb wielding it.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Ironbear24]

Then as others said, he was incompetent or as I said he actually was trying to bully/bluff you and had no intent to use the knife.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

To be honest if someone grabbed me and tried punching me while I had a knife, they would be gutted like a fish. They would be exposing all of their centerline to me and well, that is where all the important stuff happens to be,

 

[Juany118]

I know of no self-defense system built on a single instance of something working. I know of none built on a half-dozen instances.

Now, if you're referring to continuing validation, yeah. There are techniques ans principles that only get occasional real-world validation, and we have to take that for what it's worth. Best if there's some extra attempt made at validation besides that.

And this is what I have been saying. His premise basically is "it worked once thus proven" when in such a context it can be luck, it can be lack of intent to use on the part of the knife wielder etc.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk