ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Its the internet I didn't know I needed to spell out the use of force scale to you. So sorry.
I stand by my post. Break into my house to cause me or my family harm and well BULLET.............
Sport And TMA....Again
- Thread starter MJS
- Start date
I stand by my post. Break into my house to cause me or my family harm and well BULLET.............
lklawson
Grandmaster
Which CaCC? U.S. based Collar and Elbow (it continued on the ground after a non-decisive throw)? Lose Wrestling? Carnival Wrestling? 19th C. "Pro" wrestling? Gotch style (I like it because of his "Famous Toe Holds")? Hackenschmidt style (kinda meh)? Toombs and Hitchcock style?
My favorite is Leonard's 1897 CaCC manual because of all the locks & chokes and because of the significance of the date.
View attachment $293207_243405702367854_3953141_n.jpg
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
lklawson
Grandmaster
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Ok I figured most were smart enough to realize what I ment. Sorry I'll try harder for you next time
lklawson
Grandmaster
Again, I'm not your enemy here. I didn't piss in your wheaties.
All I can go by is what you write. I've found that making assumptions about whether or not someone might have intended some post to include some sort of "other" (such as a use of force scale) is a sure way to cause problems.
Now, do you really want to keep being a dick?
lklawson
Grandmaster
OK, I get ya. I digress.Ouch!
Yame!
You are the good guys!
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Y'all can discuss this matter in a CIVILIZED manner. You are given some leeway when it comes to attacking the message, but attacking the one bearing the message isn't allowed. Period.
There were staff member warnings placed in this thread. I suggest that everyone who wants to keep this discussion going on, abide by those warnings.
That being said...
ATTENTION ALL USERS:
Keep this discussion on topic and civil. Further disruptions will result in the issuance of infraction penalties.
-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator
There were staff member warnings placed in this thread. I suggest that everyone who wants to keep this discussion going on, abide by those warnings.
That being said...
ATTENTION ALL USERS:
Keep this discussion on topic and civil. Further disruptions will result in the issuance of infraction penalties.
-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Aliveness has become kind of a trigger word in the MA community, but the ideas behind it are mostly sound. While the "four I" model applies to most decent training (intentionally or not), the idea that EVERY SINGLE thing you do in training MUST BE ALIVE is debatable. I'd say that most of the training should be "alive," but not necessarily all of it. There's room for kata and drills.
This really depends upon one's goals in training. Somehow, the thread turned from Sport and TMA to BJJ for Self Defense. I've said before, I question the value of training purely for self defense, unless one is in a position to apply the skills in context. In other words, unless you are routinely defending yourself, your "self defense" training is questionable... for you. I believe that one should practice skills that one can apply. I don't get into fights. As I said earlier, I am boring. I don't drink to excess. I don't hang out in bars or ride a Harley with a biker gang. I go home each night, play video games with my teenagers and watch cartoons with my five year old.
If I'm REALLY interested in self defense, I'll buy a 12 ga shotgun and get the entire family (minus the 5 year old) trained in safe handling and use of force training.
For me, and I believe for most people, training for sport is a great way to train for application. Even if one chooses not to compete, training with competitors keeps the training focused, maintains consistency from school to school and allows students to apply the techniques in context.
As long as everyone understands that there are ALWAYS rules, I agree with this. There are ways to pressure test different techniques, but I cringe when someone says, "Yeah, but I train FOR REAL SELF DEFENSE and not sport. My techniques are designed to END FIGHTS." Yeah? Sure, the technique is deadly, but the question is whether YOU are deadly. Are you? If you've never done it, how do you know?
Rickson Gracie (or Bruce Lee or whoever) is a badass. He does the same armbar technique I do. Am I a badass? I'd say, without a trace of false modesty, that I am not a badass. And, on the scale of badassery, even though I execute many of the same techniques Rickson Gracie does, I'm not even close. Point being that, just because he can execute a technique doesn't mean that I can execute that same technique. The technique is sound. It is effective. The question is, AM I EFFECTIVE?
And how can one answer that question? By executing technique in context. Am I able to defend myself against a ninja horde? I don't know. Am I able to defend myself against a single, knife wielding meth addict? I don't know. I've never done any of these things, and so regardless of knowing academically that the techniques are effective, I do not know whether I am effective.
Can I force an average guy with no training to submit in one of several ways? Yes. I know that I can. Am I confident that I can disengage and return to my feet if taken down by the average guy? Yes. I am confident because I do these things in context against people trying very hard to stop me.
I'd like to see it get back there. A much more constructive conversation in my mind.
While the knife technique was questionable, you guys do understand that the multiple attacker video was tongue in cheek. Right?
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Unless it's the dreaded Land Shark.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
So what is a typical BJJ reaction to more than one assailant?
Yes of course and non of that was BJJ, my post was in response to someone saying they view all grappling as BJJ.
Last edited:
Hell, all of it is awesome IMO! I'm partial to the Carnival years and then the North American Pancrase fighters who brought it back from Japan and ruled the MMA world with it!
No peaceful sword at th end of this post........ Feathers = ruffled?:boxing:
I was hoping that that might be part of the other thread. Anything of value will be lost in this train wreck.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
I was hoping that that might be part of the other thread. Anything of value will be lost in this train wreck.
Good point
Mate you've hijacked three threads so far. Why do you think so many people are upset with you? I have called literally dozens of your posts. If you settled down and stopped posting opinions as facts, stopped telling us that BJJ was the answer to everything and if you don't study BJJ you may as well pack up your toys and go home, you would find a whole different ball game like we enjoyed before you joined MT. If you have a day to spare, reread your posts. You will find what I have described not far in, say page 2, then 3,4,5,6 etc up to and including page 50. Now, I must admit I might be a bit down on the grey matter having been belted across the ears too many times over too many years but I don't often need to be told something twice let alone twenty five times, especially when we agree with your main point.
:asian:
And it is in context we should all be training. Whether that is a sporting context or a RB context is up to the individual.Aliveness has become kind of a trigger word in the MA community, but the ideas behind it are mostly sound. While the "four I" model applies to most decent training (intentionally or not), the idea that EVERY SINGLE thing you do in training MUST BE ALIVE is debatable. I'd say that most of the training should be "alive," but not necessarily all of it. There's room for kata and drills.
Once again, it depends on the purpose for which you train kata. In terms of karate, if you are into sport and competition then that is what kata is for you. If you are into RBSD then kata is an integral part of your practical training.
This really depends upon one's goals in training. Somehow, the thread turned from Sport and TMA to BJJ for Self Defense. I've said before, I question the value of training purely for self defense, unless one is in a position to apply the skills in context. In other words, unless you are routinely defending yourself, your "self defense" training is questionable... for you. I believe that one should practice skills that one can apply. I don't get into fights. As I said earlier, I am boring. I don't drink to excess. I don't hang out in bars or ride a Harley with a biker gang. I go home each night, play video games with my teenagers and watch cartoons with my five year old.
If I'm REALLY interested in self defense, I'll buy a 12 ga shotgun and get the entire family (minus the 5 year old) trained in safe handling and use of force training.
All my training is directed at self defence, not that I expect to use it that way. When I read about the kata being fighting systems I am absolutely hooked on exploring what that means. I have started way too late in life to explore all the Goju kata but the ones I am immersed in are incredible. The understanding of the men that constructed those systems is beyond my imagination. Some people enjoy cryptic crosswords, some people play chess. I'm happy tinkering with kata.
For me, and I believe for most people, training for sport is a great way to train for application. Even if one chooses not to compete, training with competitors keeps the training focused, maintains consistency from school to school and allows students to apply the techniques in context.
When you are young and strong, training for sport and competition is fine. As you get older that is far less attractive. Most of my friends from years ago have stopped training because sport is not an option and because all their training was in the sporting direction, they gave it away. Reality based training does all the sporting stuff but so much more. Obviously that is a little different for BJJ as you really just have the techniques.
As long as everyone understands that there are ALWAYS rules, I agree with this. There are ways to pressure test different techniques, but I cringe when someone says, "Yeah, but I train FOR REAL SELF DEFENSE and not sport. My techniques are designed to END FIGHTS." Yeah? Sure, the technique is deadly, but the question is whether YOU are deadly. Are you? If you've never done it, how do you know?
I think we all know in reality. If you are pressure testing your techniques and your partner taps out you can be pretty sure that that technique will work in the real world. The difference is not if the techniques are effective but if you have more techniques at your disposal in the TMAs than in the sport based systems.
Rickson Gracie (or Bruce Lee or whoever) is a badass. He does the same armbar technique I do. Am I a badass? I'd say, without a trace of false modesty, that I am not a badass. And, on the scale of badassery, even though I execute many of the same techniques Rickson Gracie does, I'm not even close. Point being that, just because he can execute a technique doesn't mean that I can execute that same technique. The technique is sound. It is effective. The question is, AM I EFFECTIVE?
Surely that is why we all keep training.
And how can one answer that question? By executing technique in context. Am I able to defend myself against a ninja horde? I don't know. Am I able to defend myself against a single, knife wielding meth addict? I don't know. I've never done any of these things, and so regardless of knowing academically that the techniques are effective, I do not know whether I am effective.
But if someone tries to give you a hard time, are you confident in your ability to handle that situation? If so your training has been invaluable.
Can I force an average guy with no training to submit in one of several ways? Yes. I know that I can. Am I confident that I can disengage and return to my feet if taken down by the average guy? Yes. I am confident because I do these things in context against people trying very hard to stop me.
:asian:
Similar threads
