Techniques you learn in your MA that are probably not a good idea for Self Defense

[drop bear]

Eye gouges. I think they are slow to get on and don't do the job all that well. Pushing the nose back is quicker and hurts more.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Not a huge fan for RNC or even mount for holding people down.

Yeah. Bad idea. If you've got an RNC, don't hold them down. Just put them out.

 

[drop bear]

Yeah. Bad idea. If you've got an RNC, don't hold them down. Just put them out.

Nah top pressure until their soul dies.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Nah top pressure until their soul dies.

Sure, that's fine, in some circumstances. My thinking here is based on my own situation. I don't fight with people in the street (I would, if absolutely necessary, but that's long odds). I do end up in way too many physical confrontations in the ER. Frankly, after Chauvin, using the tactics from that video is quite likely to upset some the administrative staff.
Historically, most of our confrontations wouldn't require an RNC or anything of the sort. Just get hands on them, get them down, and that allows others to get involved. Over the years, there have been a few incidents where there wasn't going to be any help soon enough to matter. And in those cases, the goal is to put them out as quickly as possible. For that, the RNC is an excellent option (though obviously there are others).
For those who have never done this, there's one other issue worth mentioning....
In one case that required putting the patient to sleep, I was able to get them partly onto the bed. Torso on the bed, legs hanging down. Help arrived. Security started grabbing restraints, and another nurse bent down to grab the legs and help me get him on the bed.
That's when his bladder let loose....
That nurse still tells people that I am responsible for his first Golden Shower.
And the fact that he says "first" creeps me out a little...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Not a huge fan for RNC or even mount for holding people down.

I had used RNC in the street. It worked very well.

https://i.postimg.cc/d3j0xP6h/my-sweep-choke.gif

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I assume you are talking about a joke.

Many years ago, There was a post that said, "You crack open your opponent's skull. Take a handful of his brain, put into your mouse, look around, and smile.

I wish I was talking about a joke. That is an actual technique we learned. At purple belt (fourth belt out of 12 total).

 

[isshinryuronin]

My general answer to the basic question is: Any technique that requires more than three separate motions to execute. A fundamental truth is that in a real confrontation, your beautiful dojo form will be halved. Each motion has the capacity to not be perfect. This, in turn, makes the next motion more difficult. Also, the capacity for the opponent to counter, slip out of, or stumble unpredictably exists at each step. Complex tactics may work in chess, but combat has to be simple and fairly direct. A double feint may work in a tournament, but not so smart in the street. I'll take ferocity, speed, power and simple checks over fancy technique any time.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

My general answer to the basic question is: Any technique that requires more than three separate motions to execute.

Agree with you 100% there. I have always believed that 1 is better than 1,2 and 1,2 is better than 1,2,3.

For example, you step in your back leg and then kick your front leg can be a 2 steps process. But if you make it into a jump kick (kick front foot before you land back foot), it can be 1 step process. In MA training, we all try to reduce 1,2 to 1 and 1,2,3 to 1,2.

This is also why it's important to coordinate your foot with your hand. If you coordinate your foot and hand, 2 steps process can be combined into 1 step process.

 

[geezer]

Whether it's 6-12 or 12-6, it's got to be illegal to strike through an elbow the wrong way. That's unsportsmanlike conduct in any combat sport. It's definitely not one of the kung fu techniques allowed in San Shou. Instead of locking a limb, you just pull and fulcrum, fast. Snap.

Illegal? Dunno. I'm not a close follower of MMA and am not really up on the rules, but is hitting the elbow to hyper-extend it any more horrible than doing the same thing to a knee? You know, thrust-kicking the knee to hyper-extend it ...or at least hurting it, Jon Jones style, like this:

Note: As the video shows, Jones doesn't necessarily have to hyper-extend his opponent's knee, but repeated hits will bruise the heck out of his opponent's leg. Similarly a hard hit against an opponent's elbow wouldn't have to break it to hurt it enough to serious reduce their ability to use their arm against you. That's how we train it in our Escrima, anyway.

So getting back to the topic of this thread, Maybe it's risky for competition. But, I'd say it's not at all over the top for self-defense.

 

[geezer]

BTW that front kick to the knee is really basic to Wing Chun sparring. Especially dealing with a boxer. In our group we use it almost like a boxer uses a jab. It's quick, sneaky and hard to see ("shadowless"), it controls distance, robs power from their punches (if they weight their front leg), and can make them drop their guard creating openings. All good things IMO.

And it can be trained safely with light, controlled contact, targeting the thigh, above the knee.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Maybe it's risky for competition. But, I'd say it's not at all over the top for self-defense.

There are many moves in Chinese wrestling that you don't use in "friendly sport", but only use in "unfriendly challenge". The outer leg twisting is a good example. You twist your opponent's knee joint side way to hurt his knee. If you use it in the

- friendly sport, it may end with a fist fight.
- unfriendly challenge, you can always say it's just an accident.

In my teacher's last tournament, he had a tie with Zhou Shi-Bin during his championship fight. Zhou got famous over night. Next day, my teacher's young brother challenged Zhou and hurt him badly during the challenge. It proves how dirty the MA society was. A challenge sometime means just to hurt your opponent badly.

Today we talk about sport and self-defense. We don't talk much about "unfriendly challenge".

 

[JowGaWolf]

Meant to permanently maim a fighter

This probably needs to be classified or redefined in Martial Arts as a whole. There's very little that is found in Martial Arts that can "Permanently maim a fighter" or in this case an "attacker" since the OP is stating this in the context of self-defense.

Permanently injuring people will vary based on the type of medical services a person has access to. I don't have any doubt that it was accurate 100+ years ago, but these days modern medicine can pretty much patch a person up so that even the term "permanently injured" may be as small less flexibility or as severe as full loss of use.

In terms of modern medicine permanently injured probably should be defined as things that medicine of the day cannot fix. A lot of the injuries that we have seen in professional sports would be "game enders" a hundred years or more.

 

[JowGaWolf]

If a guy is on the ground and self defense is the goal, why are you killing him by stomping on his head?

Because a guy can still be dangerous on the ground. The question isn't that he's on the ground but what state is he in when he's on the ground. Just because a person is on the ground doesn't mean that they are of no danger to you. A person that's on the ground that is unable to continue to attack you is something different. We can look at how police officers take care when putting people on the ground. They still treat that person as a threat with guns drawn.

Not nick picking, just not willing to make it a general statement as I know you are talking about someone who can no longer attack back.

 

[JowGaWolf]

In Chinese culture, before you start a street fight, you first try to find a brick (巷战神器 - street fight master tool).

View attachment 27559
View attachment 27560

I always like your brick comments because my grandfather's saying is just that. He saying is "if you fight someone who is bigger than you, find a brick, smash them in the face, and run."

I can only assume there were a lot of bricks laying around at one time. Or it could just mean, you find something that gives you an advantage and use it. Which is how I think of his saying today.

The Run part of the saying is actually plan B. If you throw a brick at your attacker and miss, then you have done 2 things.
1. Made your attacker very mad for trying to hit him with a brick
2. Given your attacker a brick to attack you with.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Yeah, I always think of the curb stomp, and have said as much in other threads. If a guy is on the ground and self defense is the goal, why are you killing him by stomping on his head? Sounds like a terrible idea...

The goal of self defense is to end the threat. If the other person is on the ground, this may or may not mean the threat has ended. If it hasn't, curb stomping their head may well be a good choice.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I always like your brick comments because my grandfather's saying is just that. He saying is "if you fight someone who is bigger than you, find a brick, smash them in the face, and run."

An instructor way back when told me "Hit the soft parts with your hand. Hit the hard parts with an implement".
Pretty good advise, generally speaking.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Did they really have to put the Looney Toons concentric circles behind the title?

ha ha ha. conspiracy times. World Wars were actually the doing of Looney Toons .

 

[JowGaWolf]

BTW that front kick to the knee is really basic to Wing Chun sparring. Especially dealing with a boxer. In our group we use it almost like a boxer uses a jab. It's quick, sneaky and hard to see ("shadowless"), it controls distance, robs power from their punches (if they weight their front leg), and can make them drop their guard creating openings. All good things IMO.

And it can be trained safely with light, controlled contact, targeting the thigh, above the knee.

I used to train it by redirecting the kick to the shins instead of the knee. No one else in the school was good enough with it to have the necessary control to target the top of the thighs. It's probably the most under utilized kick regardless of what it's targeting. One of my favorite kicks

 

[Oily Dragon]

Illegal? Dunno. I'm not a close follower of MMA and am not really up on the rules, but is hitting the elbow to hyper-extend it any more horrible than doing the same thing to a knee? You know, thrust-kicking the knee to hyper-extend it ...or at least hurting it, Jon Jones style, like this:

Note: As the video shows, Jones doesn't necessarily have to hyper-extend his opponent's knee, but repeated hits will bruise the heck out of his opponent's leg. Similarly a hard hit against an opponent's elbow wouldn't have to break it to hurt it enough to serious reduce their ability to use their arm against you. That's how we train it in our Escrima, anyway.

So getting back to the topic of this thread, Maybe it's risky for competition. But, I'd say it's not at all over the top for self-defense

The legs can take a lot more than the elbow.

And why do MMA fighters tap out to lose when arm locked, rather than scream in horrible pain?

It's because even though it's entirely possible to snap limbs in multiple ways, especially with jujutsu-based arts, professionally they don't allow it for at least a couple reasons. They don't want to lose fighters, it's unsportsmanlike and unnecessary. The same goes for all the other banned techniques.

So an armbar is as far as it goes. Gone are the days of just popping that socket out. If you're suggesting it might save your life outside of sport, I also agree. I would just never want to have to do it to someone.

I've practice this technique with resistance, it's not funny at all.

 

[Oily Dragon]

This probably needs to be classified or redefined in Martial Arts as a whole. There's very little that is found in Martial Arts that can "Permanently maim a fighter" or in this case an "attacker" since the OP is stating this in the context of self-defense.

Permanently injuring people will vary based on the type of medical services a person has access to. I don't have any doubt that it was accurate 100+ years ago, but these days modern medicine can pretty much patch a person up so that even the term "permanently injured" may be as small less flexibility or as severe as full loss of use.

In terms of modern medicine permanently injured probably should be defined as things that medicine of the day cannot fix. A lot of the injuries that we have seen in professional sports would be "game enders" a hundred years or more.

Bone splinting is part of the Southern Shaolin tradition, including Jow Ga.

When you find the kung fu styles with the EMT training built in, you've found the good stuff.