Sport Fighter

[Gerry Seymour]

He usually just needs to click "Reply" doesn't he?

Yep. If he's replying with an app, it might be a different process. And on a slow connection (as I'm sometimes on) it can get finicky. Or he might just have a habit from another forum.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Reality, it is the ONLY place where you will know 100% but, I also know, that a number of people, will classify it has insane and dangerous.

Up until that point though, the hip throw is hypothetical. As are all techniques, and that is ok.

It is ok to say "I don't know if it works in reality" there is nothing wrong with admitting that.

Although the sport arena is a decent place to test, it is simply a preliminary test. And, to say it is the only place to safely test it, is still putting it in the area of "I don't know"

If by "reality" you mean fights outside sport, even that won't give you 100%. Nothing really will - there are far too many variables.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

An assumption, is not proof. But, you do stand a good chance or the worst chance, when it actually occurs. It's a crap shoot t the worst time.

That is the point-"How as an individual, without personal experience, can you tell another, 'yes it works in reality' " or "it's the best chance"

It then goes back to, how do you know.

I guess that is really my point.

Should you be teaching a technique, that hasn't been proven by you, yourself and claiming that it works.

How many times should someone use a single technique in "real life" combat before they consider it not a fluke? And against what kinds of people? You're making a distinction that doesn't really have a good cutoff to it.

 

[Martial D]

.

t's entirely relevant, because that's the whole point of what I was saying!

Sure.

Our conversations always seem to follow the same pattern.

You make a claim I find to be implausible.

I ask you to back it up with evidence.

You refuse,pretend you didn't make said claim, and shift to something else. I'm not sure why I keep expecting anything different.

It would be possible for me to test this against someone in sparring, but not in a match.

You wrote that. I quite reasonably asked how you can perform a technique on someone resisting when it's sparring, but at the same time cannot do it in a fight because it's somehow too deadly.

Surely even you can see that is nonsensical?

Especially given that you explicitly stated it can't work at anything less than full speed.
Do you read your own posts?

At this point I'd be absolutely shocked if you gave me a straight answer, or any kind of evidence you are talking about a functional technique and not cooperative tma nonsense.

 

[skribs]

You refuse,pretend you didn't make said claim, and shift to something else. I'm not sure why I keep expecting anything different.

I stand by every claim I make. If you reword it into a claim I didn't make, that's not my fault.

I don't have video evidence to show you. So I try and re-word what I'm saying, use metaphors and analogies for you to understand. Because what we are trying to fix is your lack of understanding of how something works. I agree a video would be better, but I can't post those. I won't explain why, because frankly it's none of your business. I provide the evidence I am capable of providing, in effort to explain to you what I mean.

If you can't see how pulling a punch and pulling an arm break are the same concept, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not evading the question. I'm trying to find some way to make you understand what I'm talking about, because you clearly don't with the specific technique in question.

You wrote that. I quite reasonably asked how you can perform a technique on someone resisting when it's sparring, but at the same time cannot do it in a fight because it's somehow too deadly.

I fully explained why I thought that way. If you're going to ignore my explanation and just re-quote what I said earlier, then again - it's not my fault..

I have explained multiple times how the rules of sparring as a simulation, vs. the rules of competition with the goal of winning, affect the outcome. I have a technique that can break your arm, but will not hold you in place. This technique will break your arm if used full speed, and give you an opportunity to escape if not used at full speed.

In sparring, if I get to the point where I would break my opponent's arm, they tap. They recognize what would have happened if I followed through. (Just like a punch). They recognize that had this not been a game, their arm would be broken.

In a competition, they may recognize that, but it doesn't matter. Because that's not the goal.

So let me ask you this:

1. If you are doing light sparring, should you try to knock out your opponent?
2. If you are doing light sparring, and your opponent taps you on the jaw, in a perfect position to follow through with a knockout blow, do you acknowledge that he would have KO'd you, or at least rocked you good? Or do you say "you only tapped me, that didn't count."
3. If you are in a match, and someone taps you on the jaw, do you tap out because he could have knocked you out?

 

[Martial D]

I stand by every claim I make. If you reword it into a claim I didn't make, that's not my fault.

I actually quoted your exact words. I only did this here because you keep deflecting that claim to mean something other than the words you used.

I don't have video evidence to show you. So I try and re-word what I'm saying, use metaphors and analogies for you to understand. Because what we are trying to fix is your lack of understanding of how something works. I agree a video would be better, but I can't post those. I won't explain why, because frankly it's none of your business. I provide the evidence I am capable of providing, in effort to explain to you what I mean.

I'll just have to go ahead and assume it's because such evidence does not exist. You can't link YouTube videos you say? And it's none of my business why? And the dog ate your homework? LOL.

If you can't see how pulling a punch and pulling an arm break are the same concept, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not evading the question. I'm trying to find some way to make you understand what I'm talking about, because you clearly don't with the specific technique in question.

Right. I'm not sure if you are being disingenuous or are just not getting it. Yes, all of that is obvious. No, it doesn't relate to the words you used or the follow up questions I asked.

If you REALLY meant something else..then..you know what..forget it lol.

I fully explained why I thought that way. If you're going to ignore my explanation and just re-quote what I said earlier, then again - it's not my fault..

I have explained multiple times how the rules of sparring as a simulation, vs. the rules of competition with the goal of winning, affect the outcome. I have a technique that can break your arm, but will not hold you in place. This technique will break your arm if used full speed, and give you an opportunity to escape if not used at full speed.

In sparring, if I get to the point where I would break my opponent's arm, they tap. They recognize what would have happened if I followed through. (Just like a punch). They recognize that had this not been a game, their arm would be broken.

In a competition, they may recognize that, but it doesn't matter. Because that's not the goal.

Oh, so you mean just like every bjj submission. They tap, you stop, but you can fully cripple them if they don't.

There is either time to tap, or there isn't because it's too fast. If there is time it's the exact same as actual working techniques there is evidence for. If there isn't how can the guy in sparring tap?

Why does one guy have time to tap and the other doesn't when it only works at full speed? Lolol

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I was thinking about this today. I was thinking about some of the submissions we use in Hapkido. For example, the arm bar we typically use is where our opponent is on their back, we put our foot under their shoulder and pull their arm straight against our knee. Compare this with the sitting arm bar done in BJJ or Judo, where you are on the ground, pinning your opponent with your legs, while you pull the arm back against your hips.

The biggest difference in the BJJ method is the amount of control you have. You have a lot more control over your opponent, they have less movement options, and are basically trapped while you can set the armbar at the point where they tap.

The Hapkido position still has some control (especially over a layman), but you don't have as much control as the sitting position. If I were to do a standing armbar against a completely resisting opponent, at a safe speed which allows him to tap, there's going to be an opening he can take. If I go at full speed, the arm will break before he can tap.

To be clear - I'm not saying if I were to try this in MMA, that I would break everyone's arm. However, if I were to do this move in MMA, one of two things would happen:

• I set it and hope they tap, but 50/50 they can escape
• I apply it in such a way that they can't tap before I destroy their elbow

It would be possible for me to test this against someone in sparring, but not in a match.

This is a major difficulty with standing armbars. It's not that they can't work, because they certainly can. The problem is that because you have less control of your opponent, they only work against a competent, fully resisting opponent if you apply them full speed, which doesn't leave time to tap. That means you can't really test and polish them properly in sparring (assuming you don't have an unlimited supply of training partners willing to have their arms broken). If you are getting taps with a standing armbar in sparring, it means your partners are tapping way early and not fully testing whether they can escape the lock. A lot of the skill involved in reliably finishing a lock comes from trial and error, finding all the subtle points of failure in the last 10% of the technique where you thought you had your opponent caught but the angle or the position or the leverage weren't quite right. With a partner tapping early to your standing armbar, you never get a chance to develop that skill.

This is one reason why, out of thousands of MMA fights, I know of only one that was finished by standing armbar (Shinya Aoki broke Keith Wisniewski's arm with a standing Waki Gatame in 2005) compared to hundreds of finishes via Juji Gatame on the ground.
(The other reason is that the increased control involved in ground submissions makes them inherently higher percentage even if skill levels were equalized.)

 

[skribs]

Why does one guy have time to tap and the other doesn't when it only works at full speed? Lolol

Because one is recognizing what would have happened had I not stopped the armbar before your arm broke.

Oh, so you mean just like every bjj submission. They tap, you stop, but you can fully cripple them if they don't.

The difference is, in BJJ, most of the time you have to first establish control. You either pin them or wrap them up in such a way they can't do anything else. If I'm doing a sitting arm bar, most of my weight is on your neck and chest, pinning you down while I execute the armbar.

In a standing armbar, there is not element of control. It must be done fast, because if not, you miss the window. This is why I keep comparing it to a punch. Because a knockout punch is usually delivered when you have no control over your opponent. You're both standing, you execute the punch with proper timing and get the knockout blow.

The standing armbar is like that. If you execute it properly at the right time, you will break the arm. If you execute it without breaking the arm, you have no control. Which is why someone in sparring can say "you would have broken my arm" and someone in a match can say "you have no control".

 

[Martial D]

Because one is recognizing what would have happened had I not stopped the armbar before your arm broke.



The difference is, in BJJ, most of the time you have to first establish control. You either pin them or wrap them up in such a way they can't do anything else. If I'm doing a sitting arm bar, most of my weight is on your neck and chest, pinning you down while I execute the armbar.

In a standing armbar, there is not element of control. It must be done fast, because if not, you miss the window. This is why I keep comparing it to a punch. Because a knockout punch is usually delivered when you have no control over your opponent. You're both standing, you execute the punch with proper timing and get the knockout blow.

The standing armbar is like that. If you execute it properly at the right time, you will break the arm. If you execute it without breaking the arm, you have no control. Which is why someone in sparring can say "you would have broken my arm" and someone in a match can say "you have no control".

So, this is a sub executed without first gaining position or control? Hmm. Righto. I'll believe it when I see it. Unfortunately your story doesn't add up enough to take your word for it.

So now there isn't time to tap..like you said before, but instead the opponent just recognizes it and tells you to stop in the half second it takes to complete it.

Consistency is a boon to credibility they say...

I'll just assume the manure here is quite thick till you can drum up something other than 'your word for it'

 

[skribs]

So, this is a sub executed without first gaining position or control? Hmm. Righto. I'll believe it when I see it. Unfortunately your story doesn't add up enough to take your word for it.

Technically "submission" might not be the right word. It's more of a limb destruction. The tap in sparring is to acknowledge it.

So now there isn't time to tap..like you said before, but instead the opponent just recognizes it and tells you to stop in the half second it takes to complete it.

Nope. The opponent recognizes it after their arm is already extended. I stop because I don't want to break their arm, and they tap to confirm their arm would have broken.

Consistency is a boon to credibility they say...

I execute the technique in practice, where I take my partner down and am able to immediately extend their arm against my knee, to where if I extend a little more the elbow will be hyperextended and break. I do not extend further, because I don't want to hurt my partner.

We practice against resistance, and I'm getting to the point I can tell before they land whether this will work or not. If they will land with their bicep curled (which would prevent the technique) I have other breaks that use a different leverage point than the back of the elbow.

I'll just assume the manure here is quite thick till you can drum up something other than 'your word for it'

You know, I'm trying to be respectful here. But when you start calling it "manure" because you don't understand it, you start to sound more and more like a chest-thumping gamer. It's getting harder and harder to talk to you, when you keep insulting what you don't understand, instead of trying to understand it.

 

[skribs]

So, this is a sub executed without first gaining position or control? Hmm. Righto. I'll believe it when I see it. Unfortunately your story doesn't add up enough to take your word for it.

So now there isn't time to tap..like you said before, but instead the opponent just recognizes it and tells you to stop in the half second it takes to complete it.

Consistency is a boon to credibility they say...

I'll just assume the manure here is quite thick till you can drum up something other than 'your word for it'

I found this. The first break he shows is what I'm talking about. (Although he does it at about 1/3 speed even in his "full speed" version, and my Master would have about 5 different things to say if I did my technique the way he does his). They're braced against the ground, and there are opportunities to roll or brace against it if given time. But if I follow through, it will work.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

So, this is a sub executed without first gaining position or control? Hmm. Righto. I'll believe it when I see it. Unfortunately your story doesn't add up enough to take your word for it.

So now there isn't time to tap..like you said before, but instead the opponent just recognizes it and tells you to stop in the half second it takes to complete it.

Consistency is a boon to credibility they say...

I'll just assume the manure here is quite thick till you can drum up something other than 'your word for it'

He’s talking about moves like this:

As evidenced in the video, they can work. For the reasons I outlined in my previous post, they’re rather low percentage against quality opponents, especially in MMA where the combatants are sweaty and slippery. They come up a little more often in Judo competition where the gi provides more friction.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I found this. The first break he shows is what I'm talking about. (Although he does it at about 1/3 speed even in his "full speed" version, and my Master would have about 5 different things to say if I did my technique the way he does his). They're braced against the ground, and there are opportunities to roll or brace against it if given time. But if I follow through, it will work.

Can't tell if it's the same from the angle, but that looks like a knife disarm I know. However, when doing the disarm we have to get a lot more control over the arm then it looks like you have.

How do you know that they wouldn't be able to twist out of the break, without having more control?

 

[skribs]

Can't tell if it's the same from the angle, but that looks like a knife disarm I know. However, when doing the disarm we have to get a lot more control over the arm then it looks like you have.

How do you know that they wouldn't be able to twist out of the break, without having more control?

1. That's not me. That's a video I found of someone I don't know.
2. When I execute this, I usually have their wrist twisted pretty good, which makes twisting much harder. I also execute it faster than this guy, giving them less time to react.
3. If they do roll away, I have other options available. If they land the on their back, for example, I will react with a similar break from a different angle. (It takes time and training to recognize which way to go). If they roll completely they will probably break their arm.

The one thing that used to thwart me a lot on this break is to basically to a bicep curl, which means I'm fighting strength-on-strength. When that happens, I let them bend their arm and I twist the arm back instead (kind of the opposite of a kimura).

 

[skribs]

He’s talking about moves like this:

As evidenced in the video, they can work. For the reasons I outlined in my previous post, they’re rather low percentage against quality opponents, especially in MMA where the combatants are sweaty and slippery. They come up a little more often in Judo competition where the gi provides more friction.

That's not the specific move I was talking about (see my post with the video linked), but it's a similar concept. That move won't be a break if done at half speed because the person will just move with it (or at the best, be thrown). But at full speed is a break.

When we do a move like that in class, it's usually half speed and is a throw.

 

[skribs]

Can't tell if it's the same from the angle, but that looks like a knife disarm I know.

A lot of the techniques translate very well from one type of defense to the other.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

1. That's not me. That's a video I found of someone I don't know.
2. When I execute this, I usually have their wrist twisted pretty good, which makes twisting much harder. I also execute it faster than this guy, giving them less time to react.
3. If they do roll away, I have other options available. If they land the on their back, for example, I will react with a similar break from a different angle. (It takes time and training to recognize which way to go). If they roll completely they will probably break their arm.

The one thing that used to thwart me a lot on this break is to basically to a bicep curl, which means I'm fighting strength-on-strength. When that happens, I let them bend their arm and I twist the arm back instead (kind of the opposite of a kimura).

Keep in mind-no experience in using that tech as a break. But if they do a bicep curl, wouldn't it be easier to change your grip to put pressure on the back of a hand for a wrist lock? I can't recall the name of the wrist lock, but looking at that technique, it seems like them curling back would put you in the perfect position for it.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

A lot of the techniques translate very well from one type of defense to the other.

The difference with the knife disarm is that it's not a break, but specifically increasing pressure in a way to force them to release. Looking over the technique, it's different in what your hand is doing, but same positioning to start (except adjust for more control before disarm).

 

[skribs]

Keep in mind-no experience in using that tech as a break. But if they do a bicep curl, wouldn't it be easier to change your grip to put pressure on the back of a hand for a wrist lock? I can't recall the name of the wrist lock, but looking at that technique, it seems like them curling back would put you in the perfect position for it.

If we change our grip we get yelled at. Changing grip is the perfect opportunity for them to slip out of your grip.

The difference with the knife disarm is that it's not a break, but specifically increasing pressure in a way to force them to release. Looking over the technique, it's different in what your hand is doing, but same positioning to start (except adjust for more control before disarm).

I'll do that and then break the arm (if I can).

 

[Tony Dismukes]

They come up a little more often in Judo competition where the gi provides more friction.

Correction - standing arm bars used to be a little more common in Judo, but I guess the current rules have banned them. Probably due to incidents like this one: