The Destroyer Style

[MJS]

Sorry, but if someone asks for help I will help them to the best of my knowledge. I will tell them it is limited. If you want more then that you really are wasting time. You can tell someone not to teach it, but you really don't know if they listen unless you follow them around. I can send you links with the legal definition of selfdefence all its limitations, even what I have looked up for handicap people. It doesn't make me an expert, but it does mean I'm not blind to it. It would depend on the person as to how you would teach them. If someone has a mental handicap it would be much different from someone who does not. It doesn't matter how old the person is, it depends on their own understanding as to what they can learn.

You may have mentioned it, but how much training do you have again? IMHO, what you're doing, is equivilant to a white or yellow belt teaching someone. Again, while your heart may be in the right place, if you yourself dont have a solid understanding of things, how is the person you're teaching going to? In all of the schools I've been a part of, nobody even thinks about teaching, until you're at least brown, maybe green.

 

[MJS]

I guess they know the same way anyones friends or family would know. Its not really a secret that you train when you do. Alot of my friends like to talk about fighting so I talk to them. I have agreed that I don't have the experience to develope a style yet. I also said I was looking for a school. If your beating the horse now its just because you want to, not because it didn't get the point. What more can I do then agree?

I'm sorry, but what you're missing is, is the fact that you are billing yourself as a teacher. IMO, someone who calls themselves a teacher, usually has much more experience than those they're teaching.

 

[MJS]

Yes I can, but so can anyone. Help others and yourslef have a better life and be stronger. I think there is a different approach for every situation and person. Sure they can. No it doesn't make it right, I never said it did. I do think if the technique fits the situation they are facing or may face later. It doesn't hurt to show them.

It doesn't hurt to show them? Umm..yes it does, especially, as I said before, if you're not showing them correctly.

 

[MJS]

You were talking about a ring. Everyone I know that fights in a ring learns boxing. Thats was my point if something works in a ring it will work against someone who doesn't have training.

How so?

You dont know? I'm sorry, but this sounds like a comment that I hear from BJJ nutriders. Those people usually take a list of things that they see their heros do. Heros being defined as the pro mma fighters that they worship. Sorry, just because something works for one, does not mean its going to work for another.

I've had people talk about high percentage moves. High percentage for who? Whats high percentage for person A, will be different from b, c and d. But these people are not seeing it, and sadly, neither are you. I'm sorry, but a good portion of the stuff that you see 'in the ring' will probably get you seriously hurt if you tried that outside of the ring. And if you can't figure that out, I dont know what else to tell you.

 

[The Destroyer Style]

So you don't understand irony then? I was talking about combatives an mentioned a ring in relation to cobble together tech. You are beyond help, if grammar and irony escape you.

So let me get this straight. Are you saying that someone who learns MMA would not be a good match for someone on the street? You think mixtures poor and somewhat inefective? It really depends on the person who learns it don't you think? Because I have a hard time with grammar doesn't mean I am beyond help. Putting down people for training even if it isn't the best way to you. Means that you are narrow minded and not much of a human being to mock them like that.
I will also say, that if you have not trained in the fighting styles they have and climb into the ring with them you are just out of luck. Don't get me wrong I know they aren't the best, but they are some of the most strong willed people in the world. You would litterally have to kill them before they would stop. Which I really don't think you would be able to. They aren't the joke that you make them out to be. Each one has their own style and individuality.
They train everyday non stop for physical and mental disapline. You can hit them as hard as you want they will still keep coming. They enjoy fighting somone at a higher level then themselves. They might not be the deadliest fighters in the world, but they still deserve respect.

 

[Omar B]

Fighting and self defense are not the same thing. Much like driving formula one and driving to work are not the same thing. And yes, styles pasted together like a Frankenstein monster tend to not have a unifying principle and it shows in parts that don't fit together.

Putting down grammar is just funny to me. A person claiming to be able to put together his own style should be able to express ideas clearly, and certainly one who intends to teach should. I count 4 separate ideas fighting for space in the first paragraph alone. Teaching, as you presented yourself as doing, then what you say you intend to do is effective communication, grammar is a large part of that.

 

[The Destroyer Style]

You dont know? I'm sorry, but this sounds like a comment that I hear from BJJ nutriders. Those people usually take a list of things that they see their heros do. Heros being defined as the pro mma fighters that they worship. Sorry, just because something works for one, does not mean its going to work for another.

I've had people talk about high percentage moves. High percentage for who? Whats high percentage for person A, will be different from b, c and d. But these people are not seeing it, and sadly, neither are you. I'm sorry, but a good portion of the stuff that you see 'in the ring' will probably get you seriously hurt if you tried that outside of the ring. And if you can't figure that out, I dont know what else to tell you.

Actually I think BJJ is pointless if you are surrounded. I know I'm not going to take someone to the ground and grapple in that situation. I don't think MMA makes a very deadly kind of fighter. My point is someone trained is better then someone not. If they take a set list because of someone else they are still real fighters. They just aren't going to learn more then anyone else. You put us in a catagory as I told Omar that is narrow minded. No not everything works the same for everyone I agree. In Boxing the heaviest man hits harder. That is why alot take different styles.

It might not be the most effective technique, but training in it takes away a huge fear of getting hit. It also teaches you to keep you face and ribs protected. I don't beleive in a high percentage anything. Either it works at that time or it doesn't. Each situation calls for something different. Trust me I will be the last person to try a flying arm bar in a real fight, or try to take someone to the ground for that matter. Once on the ground you have to finish that fight or figure out how to get away. Its good to know how to do both, but best avoided if anything.

Some of the techniques are universal knee kicks, knees, elbows, punches. If the fighter were trained well and stuck to his basics he has just as much chance to survive as any fighter. I think he may even be calmer, because he is already use to getting hit. The may not have alot of weapon knowledge, but in an unarmed fight they are going to be harder to stop then someone without training.

 

[The Destroyer Style]

Fighting and self defense are not the same thing. Much like driving formula one and driving to work are not the same thing. And yes, styles pasted together like a Frankenstein monster tend to not have a unifying principle and it shows in parts that don't fit together.

Putting down grammar is just funny to me. A person claiming to be able to put together his own style should be able to express ideas clearly, and certainly one who intends to teach should. I count 4 separate ideas fighting for space in the first paragraph alone. Teaching, as you presented yourself as doing, then what you say you intend to do is effective communication, grammar is a large part of that.

Well if your not a good fighter your aren't going to defend yourself very well. Driving both still gives you expeireience behind the wheel. Frankeinsteins Monster was brute who could have ripped a normal person in half. Its all in how you use what you learn that counts. Its funny to you because you don't struggle with it. However I see you struggle in making effective comparisons so I will let it go.

 

[Omar B]

You think so? The point's been made by myself and many others, you just fail to see it. But then, you have yet to learn a martial art. An opinion hasn't much to stand upon.

 

[Chris Parker]

(This could be a long one...)

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Wich of those fighting styles do you think would adapt the best for someone who has a lack of strength? I think they both seem pretty awsome. I did this video mainly for the elbow strikes, I know alot of time to I felt like he should swing twice and he was worried about hitting me. I was also wandering how does a military system work? How do you become certified in something like that? When a civilian learns it do they give them belts? Sorry I know thats alot of questions, but I figured I wanted to find out as much as I could about it. I will put slow motion on the next things I do. I was just pressed for time with the last one. I don't know why, but slow motion takes a while to upload.

Which would be the best for someone who has a lack of strength? Really, you're looking at the wrong thing. You are fixated on the idea that there is one system that will provide you with all the answers, while remaining completely unaware of the fact that most arts do actualy provide you with the skills for a smaller, weaker person to survive an assault, and even come out on top. Strength is an issue in sports, and size in bodybuilding. Oh, and frankly, to someone with very little experience, most things we could direct you to would seem "awesome" to you, but you would probably still miss most of what you were seeing.

You did it for the elbow strikes? Why? For the set-up you had, an elbow is a poor choice of a weapon to use. It's too short, and relies on very good body dynamics, which are hampered when seated in a chair. They can work, but these were not good examples. And as for your training partner, yeah I can see he was concerned about hitting you... but he was more worried about you hitting him! If you can't see that, don't teach/show/make videos!

As for the military systems, why do you want to know? Are you going to join one of these schools, or the army? If so, find a school and ask. If not, it is irrelevant. Oh, and I'm not talking about slowing down the film, I'm talking about you slowing down your actions and demonstrations so it can be seen clearer. It will also take a level of control you have not yet shown, as it takes away from your ego-based "look at how fast I am!" way of demonstrating. Again, if you don't know how to demonstrate properly, stop teaching/showing/making videos!

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) It is reasons like this that I feel a one on one base is needed for teaching. I know sometimes that almost impossible with large classes, but I feel the person learning would gain more that way. That is something I would also like to do. It may take hours of work, but in order to really help someone I think it would go a long way to work with them myself instead of having a huge class. Maybe four to six people at one session. I'm sure alot of people already teach this way. I don't think it will make you rich or famous, but something modest would help people more then a huge thirthy person class at once.

I do think if you have people you trust to help train that it helps alot, but is not the same. If I can't make a personal connection with someone I don't think I will understand what they need to take from something I could teach them. Some people need physical protection, some confedence, some just want to be stronger. I think its important to know
what they really need.

Based on.....? Really, this all reads like a typical sports fan who, although not having anything to do with the sport, team, or anything other than being an outside observer, deciding that they know how the team should train and play. There are benefits to both group and small teaching styles, but it doesn't seem like you have an understanding of either.

Oh, and you bringing up being rich and famous is interesting... as I have said, this all comes across to me as an exercise in ego. You have (very!) limited experience in any martial arts at all, have "padded" your resume, claim over 12 years when you have less than two actual education, and that is split over two systems, post videos of you hitting someone to demonstrate your "skills" on youtube, and talk about what is missing in martial arts (when it isn't, you just don't have the education on the subject), and how you're approach is much better. You then talk about what your system is designed for (for smaller, weaker, and handicapped people), while nothing you have shown fits your description whatsoever.

All of this adds up to someone basically stroking your own ego. The claims of why you are doing all this ("if that knowledge doesn't go to help others. You haven't did anything worth speaking of (sic)".) come across as a way to get people to listen to you. You may believe (consciously) that you are actually doing that, but none of your actions match. Instead, it is all about your ego, and the way you want to be seen. If you were really interested in helping people in this way, check your ego, drop the idea of developing your own style at all (now or in the future), go to a school, and learn. When you have some real experience under your belt, you may realise that you have absolutely on need to develop a new system, as the one you study may (and probably will) give you more than you need to help people in the way you are talking about.

To then bring up the idea of becoming "famous or rich", even saying that it probably won't happen that way, cinches it. This idea of being known for your style is on your mind, and this is all an exercise in ego. Sorry, but this is nothing to do with helping people, so either you will take this advice, or you will attack back at this percieved slight. If the former, then you may have been shocked into waking up and growing up a bit, if the latter, well, that will just prove my point really.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) I clearly put on the vidoes not to use and it was my way of fighting. Which means meant for me. I put the last one up for here. So yeah you did miss the point. My videos are not called instructionals. If anything they are up for an opinion from others who know more then me. If you read the side that (says more info) it says pros out there that would like to add to this please do.

So you put videos up with the following disclaimer/blurb at the beginning of one of them (only): This is my own fighting private style, The Destroyer Style. It is a mixture of all fighting styles I know. I have used only techniques that work. All of my techniques could permanently injure an opponent so please do not practice them unless you do them slow and cautiously. Never fight unless it is a life or death situation. Every life is valuable and should be protected....

As I have already said, this little blurb here seems to serve only to give the impresson that you actually know what you are talking about. And as I have already said, the clips themselves show you don't. But really, the only reason to put them up is for people to see them. And if you are wanting people to see them, you want them to learn from them (this isn't entertainment here, it's presented in the guise of educational material). So your claims here of "it's just for me, it's not instructional, it's so others who know better can give me ideas" is either lying (possibly to yourself as well), or just plain ignorant of the nature of what you are doing (both in regards to martial arts and posting videos online).

Oh, and pro's aren't going to make comments. You will only get them from people just as inexperienced or worse. But I have made some comments about your clips here (albeit nowhere near as detailed as I could be), and that doesn't seem to have been taken on board. You don't want to be seen as an instructor? Stop teaching/showing/making videos!

Oh, and for the love of all that is good and holy, Choson Ninja as a friend there? Really? That does not help your credibility at all, you know, but I'm not going into why with our fraudbusting rules in effect...

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Sorry, but if someone asks for help I will help them to the best of my knowledge. I will tell them it is limited. If you want more then that you really are wasting time. You can tell someone not to teach it, but you really don't know if they listen unless you follow them around. I can send you links with the legal definition of selfdefence all its limitations, even what I have looked up for handicap people. It doesn't make me an expert, but it does mean I'm not blind to it. It would depend on the person as to how you would teach them. If someone has a mental handicap it would be much different from someone who does not. It doesn't matter how old the person is, it depends on their own understanding as to what they can learn.

If someone asks for help, you can say no. Say you aren't experienced enough, you're really just a beginner yourself. You do not have to show them anything, especially if you are not in a position to be of any real help. You really can do more harm if you try to teach to early than if you don't teach at all. If you don't understand that, then you have no business teaching/showing/making videos.

Oh, and talking to people like JKS about what reading you've done on self defence legal definitions isn't going to help. I would suggest that his understanding is significantly higher.

Originally Posted by shesulsa
So you can copy moves. Good for you. Do you have an underlying theme to your style? If so what would that be? What is the approach, per se?

I think anyone can take a list of moves and show someone else how they do them - it doesn't mean it's right.



(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Yes I can, but so can anyone. Help others and yourslef have a better life and be stronger. I think there is a different approach for every situation and person. Sure they can. No it doesn't make it right, I never said it did. I do think if the technique fits the situation they are facing or may face later. It doesn't hurt to show them.

(Had to include Shesulsa's original quote there, the answer is a bit multi-directional...) Just copying moves does not a martial artist (or martial art) make. I believe that was Shesulsa's point to begin with. This whole post is saying you think there is a move for every situation, and if you approach martial arts with that idea in mind, then you miss the point entirely.

As for Shesulsa's asking about if you had an underlying theme to your system, you have missed the point on that as well. Your answer "Help others and yourslef have a better life and be stronger" is a personal value, not a philosophical base upon which to establish a martial system. One of the things that makes a particular martial art unique and distinct from others is it's guiding philosophy. That is then expressed through it's movements and actions, which are physical expressions of the strategies and tactics the philosophy requires. You are focussing on the moves, and have none of the basis we have been talking about. This is why you cannot form your own system, even if you want to.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) You were talking about a ring. Everyone I know that fights in a ring learns boxing. Thats was my point if something works in a ring it will work against someone who doesn't have training.

(Originally posted by Shesulsa) A common misconception.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) How so?

Oh boy. You know, I'm just going to say this: sport = sport, self defence = self defence. Lots of things that you do in a ring will not work in a street environment, lots of things that you do for self defence will not be applicable/work in a competitive environment. Many many threads here on that, no need to rehash old ground.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) So let me get this straight. Are you saying that someone who learns MMA would not be a good match for someone on the street?

Okay, I'm going to break this one down, there are too many ideas going on at once here...

Sport systems can help in a number of ways, but they are geared specifically to a very different environment and situation to a street self defence situation. This would be that guiding philosophy I was talking about. The guiding philosophy behind MMA is very simple, it is to attain success in competitive matches through multiranged unarmed combative-themed tests. So it trains accordingly, and that means a focus on one-on-one, no weapons, sport-specific rules, padded ground, and more. Now the skills can certainly be transferable to a great degree, but it is not designed for street defence, and a number of it's tactics are quite dangerous to try in a real fight. Got it?

You think mixtures poor and somewhat inefective? It really depends on the person who learns it don't you think?

Mixtures where you just grab a bit of this and a bit of that are often very ineffective, as they are based not in a philosophy, nor a proven or tested methodology, but in the personal preferences and tastes of a single (often talented, experienced) individual, but being so specialised to them makes it less-than successful when it comes to transfering the skills to others. Without a real, impersonal base, it is often destined to fail after the founder of such a non-art is gone or just moves on to something else.

But bear in mind that what makes it work is not the techniques, it is the fact that the person doing it is experienced, and has found (legitimately) what works and what gels with their personality. Just putting together what makes sense to you is not the same, as a lot of common sense and rational belief goes out the window when it comes down to it.

Because I have a hard time with grammar doesn't mean I am beyond help. Putting down people for training even if it isn't the best way to you. Means that you are narrow minded and not much of a human being to mock them like that.

Okay, gotta ask. Why are you putting that full stop in there (the second one here... between "you" and "Means")? Why does your mind split one sentence like that? Because it happens far too often for it to be anything but deliberate, whether conscious or unconscious is the question. This isn't to put you down, I just don't understand how that particular synapse fires so often.

Oh, and I wouldn't go around calling Omar narrow minded and not much of a human being because he is trying to help you (he is, you know. The stuff about training, even if it isn't the best? He, and most of us here, really, are saying that if you train badly, with false ideas, false understanding, no experience, no basis, then it is worse than no training at all. That is helpful, not narrow minded). If you listen to the advice given, and take it, then you may find that years down the track, when you are coming to this from a much more removed perspective, we have really been incredibly gentle.


I will also say, that if you have not trained in the fighting styles they have and climb into the ring with them you are just out of luck.

And what happens if they haven't trained in the systems I have? How's their luck then? I have swords, remember, don't know how their muto dori is in the UFC...

Don't get me wrong I know they aren't the best, but they are some of the most strong willed people in the world.

I've known plenty of incredibly strong willed people, some of them not even martial artists, let alone MMA competitors! Really, they are athletes, very well trained, very very well conditioned (in most cases...), but athletes.

You would litterally have to kill them before they would stop. Which I really don't think you would be able to. They aren't the joke that you make them out to be. Each one has their own style and individuality.

Not really sure what you are meaning by this... I would have to kill them? Really? Okay, as I said, I have swords... But I think you are a little misguided. They are athletes. That's it. They can be stopped without killing them, you know. And yes, each has their own personal preference in terms of tactics and strategies, based on their personalities, body types, and more, but really, they all have very similar bases to work from, and very similar guiding philosophies, so the personal differences are no more than you would see in any higher-level practitioners in any system. Note the hgher-level part...


They train everyday non stop for physical and mental disapline.

No they don't. They would collapse, and it would actually be detrimental to their development. They do train intensly, but non-stop everyday is stupid. Rest days are needed, and taken by smart trainers.

You can hit them as hard as you want they will still keep coming.

Really. You seem to be idolising MMA stars a bit, attributing to them more than they are. They get knocked out, get tapped out, get beaten all the time. And martial arts aren't about hitting hard...

They enjoy fighting somone at a higher level then themselves. They might not be the deadliest fighters in the world, but they still deserve respect.

And they have respect. But I respect them for what they are, not for what you imagine them to be.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Well if your not a good fighter your aren't going to defend yourself very well. Driving both still gives you expeireience behind the wheel. Frankeinsteins Monster was brute who could have ripped a normal person in half. Its all in how you use what you learn that counts. Its funny to you because you don't struggle with it. However I see you struggle in making effective comparisons so I will let it go.

Oh boy. Yes, and if you're not a good driver, you're going to end up in a ditch. As to Omar's comments about a racing driver versus driving to work, the way the car works is the same, but the mechanics of driving them is actually very different. If you drive around a track the way you drive to work, you will go far too slowly, and probably get cleaned up. If you drive to work the way you drive around a track, you end up in a tree.

Frankensteins Monster, by the way, was not a brute. That is a major part of the irony of the story; the talented, genius Doctor was internally a monster, and the Creation, outwardly grotesque, a great hulk who inspired fear in all those around him, was gentle and looking for beauty. Therein lies the irony and tragedy of the story of Frankenstein. Just so you know.

But his comparrison was not too bad, really. The Monster was created out of disparate parts, and never fit either with the world around him, or within himself, leaving him ultimately doomed, as he cannot reconcile himself in any way. These mutt-martial arts are similar, in that without a real base to work from, there is no congruence, and the conflicting concepts that make it up will actually lead to a lack of power/skill/ability. Frankenstein's Monster indeed.

Finally, Cody, I'm going to say this bluntly.

Stop posting videos. Stop teaching others. You do not have the requisite experience or understanding. Get a teacher, and join a school. Stop thinking about starting your own system until you have some more experience, as you will most likely find that you just don't need to. And please either get a better understanding of grammer and paragraphing, or at least read your posts back to yourself before posting them to check them out. It'll help you here no end.

 

[MJS]

So let me get this straight. Are you saying that someone who learns MMA would not be a good match for someone on the street? You think mixtures poor and somewhat inefective? It really depends on the person who learns it don't you think? Because I have a hard time with grammar doesn't mean I am beyond help. Putting down people for training even if it isn't the best way to you. Means that you are narrow minded and not much of a human being to mock them like that.
I will also say, that if you have not trained in the fighting styles they have and climb into the ring with them you are just out of luck. Don't get me wrong I know they aren't the best, but they are some of the most strong willed people in the world. You would litterally have to kill them before they would stop. Which I really don't think you would be able to. They aren't the joke that you make them out to be. Each one has their own style and individuality.
They train everyday non stop for physical and mental disapline. You can hit them as hard as you want they will still keep coming. They enjoy fighting somone at a higher level then themselves. They might not be the deadliest fighters in the world, but they still deserve respect.

Fighting and self defense are not the same thing. Much like driving formula one and driving to work are not the same thing. And yes, styles pasted together like a Frankenstein monster tend to not have a unifying principle and it shows in parts that don't fit together.

Putting down grammar is just funny to me. A person claiming to be able to put together his own style should be able to express ideas clearly, and certainly one who intends to teach should. I count 4 separate ideas fighting for space in the first paragraph alone. Teaching, as you presented yourself as doing, then what you say you intend to do is effective communication, grammar is a large part of that.

Well if your not a good fighter your aren't going to defend yourself very well. Driving both still gives you expeireience behind the wheel. Frankeinsteins Monster was brute who could have ripped a normal person in half. Its all in how you use what you learn that counts. Its funny to you because you don't struggle with it. However I see you struggle in making effective comparisons so I will let it go.

You think so? The point's been made by myself and many others, you just fail to see it. But then, you have yet to learn a martial art. An opinion hasn't much to stand upon.

Well, I have to agree with Omar here. I will say that I do tip my hat to those that step into the ring, as they are tough. However, as its been proven already, and I'll use the Fight Quest show as an example, seeing that it is a much better example than the HW show, but here we saw 2 MMA guys, both of whom again, I tip my hat to, because they busted their *** on that show, but we saw them out of the MMA atmosphere, and both admitted on live tv, that the mindset is totally different.

We saw Jimmy crumble with that elbow he took to the spine in the Kajukenbo episode, when he attempted that double leg shoot. Doug, in the Krav Maga episode, also commented that it was his instinct, to do what he was doing, yet against the KM guys, he didn't fare that well.

Again, this isn't to discredit them, but simply to show a point, that I, Omar, and a few others here are trying to make. So, using Omars driving example. I've been driving since I was 16. I'm now 36. 20yrs of driving, yet when I went from a 4cyl. car to a V8 Camaro, I had to adjust to that car and it took time. Going from a car where you stepped on the gas and barely moved, to one that you stepped on the gas and flew forward. Same thing if you go from a car to an SUV. You're still driving, but its now a larger vehicle. To think that you could go from driving a Ford Escort to an 18 wheeler, is foolish IMO.

As for mixing things together....again Cody, this is what you're failing to see. Just mixing for the sake of it, with no solid structure behind it, isn't going to amount to much, especially if the person doing it, doesnt have a solid martial arts background. How long have you been training again? If you're a beginnger and you think you can take a little of this, a little of that, a pinch of this, a pinch of that, mix it together, pop it in the over, and boom...some 'new' creation, you're kidding yourself, and doing more harm than good, to anyone that you teach. As I've said, when I'm doing techs. I'm able to flow between Kenpo and Arnis and back to Kenpo again, without giving it much thought, but the huge difference is, is that a) I've been training for over 20yrs, and b) I'm not trying to mix something to create something new. All the arts I do, when I teach, I teach them seperate. If I do show some Arnis in Kenpo class, I do make it clear that we're now doing Arnis and Arnis is also a requirement in my Kenpo school, at the upper ranks.

 

[MJS]

Actually I think BJJ is pointless if you are surrounded. I know I'm not going to take someone to the ground and grapple in that situation. I don't think MMA makes a very deadly kind of fighter. My point is someone trained is better then someone not. If they take a set list because of someone else they are still real fighters. They just aren't going to learn more then anyone else.

Wrong, you missed the point. The wannabe guys are taking things that are high percentage moves for others and making the claim for everyone else. Just because you see Rickson pull a move off, or Mike Tyson, does NOT mean that you or I or anyonoe else, will be able to do the same thing. Again, if you can't see the reasons, I dont know what to tell you. If you dont understand that, then you have no business creating something. Furthermore, you still miss the point about the training. You do not have much time in the arts. How can you expect to teach someone, be able to answer questions, show them right from wrong, if you yourself, only have a year or so under your belt?

You put us in a catagory as I told Omar that is narrow minded. No not everything works the same for everyone I agree. In Boxing the heaviest man hits harder. That is why alot take different styles.

Bro, I've been training longer than you've been alive, I bust my *** on the mat, and have proven what I can do, so for you to say I'm closed minded is childish on your part. In your dream to help others, you fail to see what the more experienced people here are trying to tell you. In your eyes, you feel that you could train in boxing for a month and run out and teach someone. I say you're not going to teach them much.

It might not be the most effective technique, but training in it takes away a huge fear of getting hit. It also teaches you to keep you face and ribs protected. I don't beleive in a high percentage anything. Either it works at that time or it doesn't. Each situation calls for something different. Trust me I will be the last person to try a flying arm bar in a real fight, or try to take someone to the ground for that matter. Once on the ground you have to finish that fight or figure out how to get away. Its good to know how to do both, but best avoided if anything.

If you want to teach, you need to have experience, which you are lacking. We're telling you, you dont want to hear. Dont know what else to say, except God help those that you are teaching. Your heart is in the right place, but for Gods sake get yourself some training first, then worry about others.

Some of the techniques are universal knee kicks, knees, elbows, punches. If the fighter were trained well and stuck to his basics he has just as much chance to survive as any fighter. I think he may even be calmer, because he is already use to getting hit. The may not have alot of weapon knowledge, but in an unarmed fight they are going to be harder to stop then someone without training.

You just said it...if the fighter were trained well. How can you train someone well, if your training exp. is lacking? While I do believe that basics are key to success, you need that solid foundation as well.

This reminds me of the Karate Kid. Great movie, loved watching it as a kid, and I still watch it from time to time. Remember when Daniel was doing his learn by book Karate, when Miyagi (sp) walked in. He said, "Oh, you learn from book?" Dan said, "Yeah, and a few months at the Y." Did you see the look on Miyagis face?

In this case, you're Daniel, and the others here are Miyagi. We're trying to guide and help you, but you dont want to see it.

Dude, you make it sound so simple, but its not. I could tell my wife to do an elbow. Would it be effective? Who knows, but I'd be willing to bet that I could take her, and make that elbow twice as effective. Why? Because I, unlike you, have been training long enough, to understand the basics. Sooo much more than just throwing it. Footwork, body alignment, proper stance, proper movement...all things that are key to success. A white or yellow belt isn't going to have that down as quick as you think. How much training time do you have again? Oh thats right:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1235670&postcount=9

You learned some techniques from a friend. I wonder...did your friend just show you a random tech. or did he start you out with a proper foundation? How much time did you spend with Sean? You said he taught you Jujitsu. Ok...so did he start you out with a foundation first? You know, position before submission and techniques, because without a solid base, NO, I repeat NO tech. will amount to anything.

I dont know why I bother sometimes, as I seems as if I'm talking to nobody. Sigh......

Let me ask you something....do you always argue with those that know more than you? I mean, I could see if you had 10yrs worth of solid training, 12yrs, hell 15, but...how much do you have again?

I know, I know...it seems like I'm picking on you Cody, like I'm singling you out. Once again, your heart is in the right place, but God damn bro, sit down and listen to what you're saying, and what others are saying. I wish that you lived closer to me, because you seem like you have your heart in the right place, have a strong desire to learn, and that IMO makes a good student. I like teaching people like that, because they would probably stand a better chance to sticking with it, compared to someone whos heart wasnt really in it.

 

[MJS]

(This could be a long one...)

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Wich of those fighting styles do you think would adapt the best for someone who has a lack of strength? I think they both seem pretty awsome. I did this video mainly for the elbow strikes, I know alot of time to I felt like he should swing twice and he was worried about hitting me. I was also wandering how does a military system work? How do you become certified in something like that? When a civilian learns it do they give them belts? Sorry I know thats alot of questions, but I figured I wanted to find out as much as I could about it. I will put slow motion on the next things I do. I was just pressed for time with the last one. I don't know why, but slow motion takes a while to upload.

Which would be the best for someone who has a lack of strength? Really, you're looking at the wrong thing. You are fixated on the idea that there is one system that will provide you with all the answers, while remaining completely unaware of the fact that most arts do actualy provide you with the skills for a smaller, weaker person to survive an assault, and even come out on top. Strength is an issue in sports, and size in bodybuilding. Oh, and frankly, to someone with very little experience, most things we could direct you to would seem "awesome" to you, but you would probably still miss most of what you were seeing.

You did it for the elbow strikes? Why? For the set-up you had, an elbow is a poor choice of a weapon to use. It's too short, and relies on very good body dynamics, which are hampered when seated in a chair. They can work, but these were not good examples. And as for your training partner, yeah I can see he was concerned about hitting you... but he was more worried about you hitting him! If you can't see that, don't teach/show/make videos!

As for the military systems, why do you want to know? Are you going to join one of these schools, or the army? If so, find a school and ask. If not, it is irrelevant. Oh, and I'm not talking about slowing down the film, I'm talking about you slowing down your actions and demonstrations so it can be seen clearer. It will also take a level of control you have not yet shown, as it takes away from your ego-based "look at how fast I am!" way of demonstrating. Again, if you don't know how to demonstrate properly, stop teaching/showing/making videos!

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) It is reasons like this that I feel a one on one base is needed for teaching. I know sometimes that almost impossible with large classes, but I feel the person learning would gain more that way. That is something I would also like to do. It may take hours of work, but in order to really help someone I think it would go a long way to work with them myself instead of having a huge class. Maybe four to six people at one session. I'm sure alot of people already teach this way. I don't think it will make you rich or famous, but something modest would help people more then a huge thirthy person class at once.

I do think if you have people you trust to help train that it helps alot, but is not the same. If I can't make a personal connection with someone I don't think I will understand what they need to take from something I could teach them. Some people need physical protection, some confedence, some just want to be stronger. I think its important to know
what they really need.

Based on.....? Really, this all reads like a typical sports fan who, although not having anything to do with the sport, team, or anything other than being an outside observer, deciding that they know how the team should train and play. There are benefits to both group and small teaching styles, but it doesn't seem like you have an understanding of either.

Oh, and you bringing up being rich and famous is interesting... as I have said, this all comes across to me as an exercise in ego. You have (very!) limited experience in any martial arts at all, have "padded" your resume, claim over 12 years when you have less than two actual education, and that is split over two systems, post videos of you hitting someone to demonstrate your "skills" on youtube, and talk about what is missing in martial arts (when it isn't, you just don't have the education on the subject), and how you're approach is much better. You then talk about what your system is designed for (for smaller, weaker, and handicapped people), while nothing you have shown fits your description whatsoever.

All of this adds up to someone basically stroking your own ego. The claims of why you are doing all this ("if that knowledge doesn't go to help others. You haven't did anything worth speaking of (sic)".) come across as a way to get people to listen to you. You may believe (consciously) that you are actually doing that, but none of your actions match. Instead, it is all about your ego, and the way you want to be seen. If you were really interested in helping people in this way, check your ego, drop the idea of developing your own style at all (now or in the future), go to a school, and learn. When you have some real experience under your belt, you may realise that you have absolutely on need to develop a new system, as the one you study may (and probably will) give you more than you need to help people in the way you are talking about.

To then bring up the idea of becoming "famous or rich", even saying that it probably won't happen that way, cinches it. This idea of being known for your style is on your mind, and this is all an exercise in ego. Sorry, but this is nothing to do with helping people, so either you will take this advice, or you will attack back at this percieved slight. If the former, then you may have been shocked into waking up and growing up a bit, if the latter, well, that will just prove my point really.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) I clearly put on the vidoes not to use and it was my way of fighting. Which means meant for me. I put the last one up for here. So yeah you did miss the point. My videos are not called instructionals. If anything they are up for an opinion from others who know more then me. If you read the side that (says more info) it says pros out there that would like to add to this please do.

So you put videos up with the following disclaimer/blurb at the beginning of one of them (only): This is my own fighting private style, The Destroyer Style. It is a mixture of all fighting styles I know. I have used only techniques that work. All of my techniques could permanently injure an opponent so please do not practice them unless you do them slow and cautiously. Never fight unless it is a life or death situation. Every life is valuable and should be protected....

As I have already said, this little blurb here seems to serve only to give the impresson that you actually know what you are talking about. And as I have already said, the clips themselves show you don't. But really, the only reason to put them up is for people to see them. And if you are wanting people to see them, you want them to learn from them (this isn't entertainment here, it's presented in the guise of educational material). So your claims here of "it's just for me, it's not instructional, it's so others who know better can give me ideas" is either lying (possibly to yourself as well), or just plain ignorant of the nature of what you are doing (both in regards to martial arts and posting videos online).

Oh, and pro's aren't going to make comments. You will only get them from people just as inexperienced or worse. But I have made some comments about your clips here (albeit nowhere near as detailed as I could be), and that doesn't seem to have been taken on board. You don't want to be seen as an instructor? Stop teaching/showing/making videos!

Oh, and for the love of all that is good and holy, Choson Ninja as a friend there? Really? That does not help your credibility at all, you know, but I'm not going into why with our fraudbusting rules in effect...

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Sorry, but if someone asks for help I will help them to the best of my knowledge. I will tell them it is limited. If you want more then that you really are wasting time. You can tell someone not to teach it, but you really don't know if they listen unless you follow them around. I can send you links with the legal definition of selfdefence all its limitations, even what I have looked up for handicap people. It doesn't make me an expert, but it does mean I'm not blind to it. It would depend on the person as to how you would teach them. If someone has a mental handicap it would be much different from someone who does not. It doesn't matter how old the person is, it depends on their own understanding as to what they can learn.

If someone asks for help, you can say no. Say you aren't experienced enough, you're really just a beginner yourself. You do not have to show them anything, especially if you are not in a position to be of any real help. You really can do more harm if you try to teach to early than if you don't teach at all. If you don't understand that, then you have no business teaching/showing/making videos.

Oh, and talking to people like JKS about what reading you've done on self defence legal definitions isn't going to help. I would suggest that his understanding is significantly higher.

Originally Posted by shesulsa
So you can copy moves. Good for you. Do you have an underlying theme to your style? If so what would that be? What is the approach, per se?

I think anyone can take a list of moves and show someone else how they do them - it doesn't mean it's right.



(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Yes I can, but so can anyone. Help others and yourslef have a better life and be stronger. I think there is a different approach for every situation and person. Sure they can. No it doesn't make it right, I never said it did. I do think if the technique fits the situation they are facing or may face later. It doesn't hurt to show them.

(Had to include Shesulsa's original quote there, the answer is a bit multi-directional...) Just copying moves does not a martial artist (or martial art) make. I believe that was Shesulsa's point to begin with. This whole post is saying you think there is a move for every situation, and if you approach martial arts with that idea in mind, then you miss the point entirely.

As for Shesulsa's asking about if you had an underlying theme to your system, you have missed the point on that as well. Your answer "Help others and yourslef have a better life and be stronger" is a personal value, not a philosophical base upon which to establish a martial system. One of the things that makes a particular martial art unique and distinct from others is it's guiding philosophy. That is then expressed through it's movements and actions, which are physical expressions of the strategies and tactics the philosophy requires. You are focussing on the moves, and have none of the basis we have been talking about. This is why you cannot form your own system, even if you want to.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) You were talking about a ring. Everyone I know that fights in a ring learns boxing. Thats was my point if something works in a ring it will work against someone who doesn't have training.

(Originally posted by Shesulsa) A common misconception.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) How so?

Oh boy. You know, I'm just going to say this: sport = sport, self defence = self defence. Lots of things that you do in a ring will not work in a street environment, lots of things that you do for self defence will not be applicable/work in a competitive environment. Many many threads here on that, no need to rehash old ground.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) So let me get this straight. Are you saying that someone who learns MMA would not be a good match for someone on the street?

Okay, I'm going to break this one down, there are too many ideas going on at once here...

Sport systems can help in a number of ways, but they are geared specifically to a very different environment and situation to a street self defence situation. This would be that guiding philosophy I was talking about. The guiding philosophy behind MMA is very simple, it is to attain success in competitive matches through multiranged unarmed combative-themed tests. So it trains accordingly, and that means a focus on one-on-one, no weapons, sport-specific rules, padded ground, and more. Now the skills can certainly be transferable to a great degree, but it is not designed for street defence, and a number of it's tactics are quite dangerous to try in a real fight. Got it?

You think mixtures poor and somewhat inefective? It really depends on the person who learns it don't you think?

Mixtures where you just grab a bit of this and a bit of that are often very ineffective, as they are based not in a philosophy, nor a proven or tested methodology, but in the personal preferences and tastes of a single (often talented, experienced) individual, but being so specialised to them makes it less-than successful when it comes to transfering the skills to others. Without a real, impersonal base, it is often destined to fail after the founder of such a non-art is gone or just moves on to something else.

But bear in mind that what makes it work is not the techniques, it is the fact that the person doing it is experienced, and has found (legitimately) what works and what gels with their personality. Just putting together what makes sense to you is not the same, as a lot of common sense and rational belief goes out the window when it comes down to it.

Because I have a hard time with grammar doesn't mean I am beyond help. Putting down people for training even if it isn't the best way to you. Means that you are narrow minded and not much of a human being to mock them like that.

Okay, gotta ask. Why are you putting that full stop in there (the second one here... between "you" and "Means")? Why does your mind split one sentence like that? Because it happens far too often for it to be anything but deliberate, whether conscious or unconscious is the question. This isn't to put you down, I just don't understand how that particular synapse fires so often.

Oh, and I wouldn't go around calling Omar narrow minded and not much of a human being because he is trying to help you (he is, you know. The stuff about training, even if it isn't the best? He, and most of us here, really, are saying that if you train badly, with false ideas, false understanding, no experience, no basis, then it is worse than no training at all. That is helpful, not narrow minded). If you listen to the advice given, and take it, then you may find that years down the track, when you are coming to this from a much more removed perspective, we have really been incredibly gentle.


I will also say, that if you have not trained in the fighting styles they have and climb into the ring with them you are just out of luck.

And what happens if they haven't trained in the systems I have? How's their luck then? I have swords, remember, don't know how their muto dori is in the UFC...

Don't get me wrong I know they aren't the best, but they are some of the most strong willed people in the world.

I've known plenty of incredibly strong willed people, some of them not even martial artists, let alone MMA competitors! Really, they are athletes, very well trained, very very well conditioned (in most cases...), but athletes.

You would litterally have to kill them before they would stop. Which I really don't think you would be able to. They aren't the joke that you make them out to be. Each one has their own style and individuality.

Not really sure what you are meaning by this... I would have to kill them? Really? Okay, as I said, I have swords... But I think you are a little misguided. They are athletes. That's it. They can be stopped without killing them, you know. And yes, each has their own personal preference in terms of tactics and strategies, based on their personalities, body types, and more, but really, they all have very similar bases to work from, and very similar guiding philosophies, so the personal differences are no more than you would see in any higher-level practitioners in any system. Note the hgher-level part...


They train everyday non stop for physical and mental disapline.

No they don't. They would collapse, and it would actually be detrimental to their development. They do train intensly, but non-stop everyday is stupid. Rest days are needed, and taken by smart trainers.

You can hit them as hard as you want they will still keep coming.

Really. You seem to be idolising MMA stars a bit, attributing to them more than they are. They get knocked out, get tapped out, get beaten all the time. And martial arts aren't about hitting hard...

They enjoy fighting somone at a higher level then themselves. They might not be the deadliest fighters in the world, but they still deserve respect.

And they have respect. But I respect them for what they are, not for what you imagine them to be.

(Originally posted by The Destroyer Style) Well if your not a good fighter your aren't going to defend yourself very well. Driving both still gives you expeireience behind the wheel. Frankeinsteins Monster was brute who could have ripped a normal person in half. Its all in how you use what you learn that counts. Its funny to you because you don't struggle with it. However I see you struggle in making effective comparisons so I will let it go.

Oh boy. Yes, and if you're not a good driver, you're going to end up in a ditch. As to Omar's comments about a racing driver versus driving to work, the way the car works is the same, but the mechanics of driving them is actually very different. If you drive around a track the way you drive to work, you will go far too slowly, and probably get cleaned up. If you drive to work the way you drive around a track, you end up in a tree.

Frankensteins Monster, by the way, was not a brute. That is a major part of the irony of the story; the talented, genius Doctor was internally a monster, and the Creation, outwardly grotesque, a great hulk who inspired fear in all those around him, was gentle and looking for beauty. Therein lies the irony and tragedy of the story of Frankenstein. Just so you know.

But his comparrison was not too bad, really. The Monster was created out of disparate parts, and never fit either with the world around him, or within himself, leaving him ultimately doomed, as he cannot reconcile himself in any way. These mutt-martial arts are similar, in that without a real base to work from, there is no congruence, and the conflicting concepts that make it up will actually lead to a lack of power/skill/ability. Frankenstein's Monster indeed.

Finally, Cody, I'm going to say this bluntly.

Stop posting videos. Stop teaching others. You do not have the requisite experience or understanding. Get a teacher, and join a school. Stop thinking about starting your own system until you have some more experience, as you will most likely find that you just don't need to. And please either get a better understanding of grammer and paragraphing, or at least read your posts back to yourself before posting them to check them out. It'll help you here no end.

QFT!! QFT!! QFT!! My God, I wish that I could rep this post about 50 more times, but alas, I give some green rep and a 'thanks' for this very well worded post.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Actually I think BJJ is pointless if you are surrounded. I know I'm not going to take someone to the ground and grapple in that situation. I don't think MMA makes a very deadly kind of fighter. My point is someone trained is better then someone not. If they take a set list because of someone else they are still real fighters. They just aren't going to learn more then anyone else. You put us in a catagory as I told Omar that is narrow minded. No not everything works the same for everyone I agree. In Boxing the heaviest man hits harder. That is why alot take different styles.

It might not be the most effective technique, but training in it takes away a huge fear of getting hit. It also teaches you to keep you face and ribs protected. I don't beleive in a high percentage anything. Either it works at that time or it doesn't. Each situation calls for something different. Trust me I will be the last person to try a flying arm bar in a real fight, or try to take someone to the ground for that matter. Once on the ground you have to finish that fight or figure out how to get away. Its good to know how to do both, but best avoided if anything.

Some of the techniques are universal knee kicks, knees, elbows, punches. If the fighter were trained well and stuck to his basics he has just as much chance to survive as any fighter. I think he may even be calmer, because he is already use to getting hit. The may not have alot of weapon knowledge, but in an unarmed fight they are going to be harder to stop then someone without training.

Back to deadly are we?

And as to techniques being universal; would you like a list of the various types of knee kicks, knees, elbows and punches I have trained and or encountered?

Wrong, you missed the point. The wannabe guys are taking things that are high percentage moves for others and making the claim for everyone else. Just because you see Rickson pull a move off, or Mike Tyson, does NOT mean that you or I or anyonoe else, will be able to do the same thing. Again, if you can't see the reasons, I dont know what to tell you. If you dont understand that, then you have no business creating something. Furthermore, you still miss the point about the training. You do not have much time in the arts. How can you expect to teach someone, be able to answer questions, show them right from wrong, if you yourself, only have a year or so under your belt?

In support of what MJS is saying and from my CMA POV; just because you know 1 move to counter a specific attack, say use a cross block against a straight punch does not mean that a cross block will work against all punches that can be categorized as a straight punch, they are not all the same. Small variations in force can make them very different. And there are variations and differences in a cross block that range form a simple cross block to a strike to Qinna.

Cody, bottom-line, IMO, and as MJS has stated; Your heart is in the right place but you simply do not have the background to do this at this time, you need more training, a lot more training. And additionally your young and you have the time to get the training so take the advice you are getting here as advice, not an attack and get on with your training so you can get to what you claim to want to do.

 

[jks9199]

"Someone trained is better than someone not."

Not necessarily. If you train everyday in poor or ineffective ways, you won't be prepared for reality no matter how much you train. If your training destroys your body so that you can't rely on it when you need to, it's not.

Some years ago, several law enforcement officers were killed in a shootout. Their deaths triggered a number of changes in training. One of the changes was how reloading was done -- because several of them died with either neat piles of spent brass or spent brass in their pockets. Why'd that happen? In training on the range, they were required to pick up their brass. So, to save time and make it easier to clean up, they would either pile it neatly or put it in their pocket. And what'd they do under pressure? EXACTLY what they practiced -- which cost them vital seconds in a fire fight.

Or... as my teacher would say, you've been lied to all your life. Practice doesn't make perfect; only PERFECT practice makes perfect.

 

[jks9199]

Well if your not a good fighter your aren't going to defend yourself very well. Driving both still gives you expeireience behind the wheel. Frankeinsteins Monster was brute who could have ripped a normal person in half. Its all in how you use what you learn that counts. Its funny to you because you don't struggle with it. However I see you struggle in making effective comparisons so I will let it go.

Actually, there are plenty of skilled competitive fighters who not only suck -- but get seriously hurt when it comes to defending themselves in a real deal. There are vital differences between sport and reality. There's a parable about a which animal will run faster, the fox or rabbit... The rabbit will outrun the fox because, while the fox is chasing its dinner -- the rabbit is running for its life. In a real violent attack, they're not facing a relatively equal opponent who is going to pretty much comply with the rules. The old Jim Carey skit about being attacked "the wrong way" is a great example...

 

[jks9199]

Again, this isn't to discredit them, but simply to show a point, that I, Omar, and a few others here are trying to make. So, using Omars driving example. I've been driving since I was 16. I'm now 36. 20yrs of driving, yet when I went from a 4cyl. car to a V8 Camaro, I had to adjust to that car and it took time. Going from a car where you stepped on the gas and barely moved, to one that you stepped on the gas and flew forward. Same thing if you go from a car to an SUV. You're still driving, but its now a larger vehicle. To think that you could go from driving a Ford Escort to an 18 wheeler, is foolish IMO.

One more thing on the driving analogy, to highlight the difference in reality versus sport.

The academy my agency uses has a great training track, special built for them by a company with a reputation for building race tracks. The guy who designed the academy track, who was nationally known for police driver training, had to argue with the track builder about several turns. Why? Because they weren't banked the way a racetrack is. There is exactly one racetrack-style banked turn on the track; it's at the end of a long straightaway, and it's banked as the slowdown area for the high speed stuff. The rest of it is banked -- or not banked! -- like a regular road. Because we don't drive cruisers fast on racetracks. We drive them in the real world, where turns are often banked "backwards" because the priority is on drainage, not facilitating high speed driving. And our track replicates the real world... which means our training prepares us for the real world. We practice in cruisers just like the ones on the road, with the same equipment set up the same way, as on the streets. The track has traffic lights, intersections, and more. The only thing it doesn't have when we train on it is traffic...

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Or... as my teacher would say, you've been lied to all your life. Practice doesn't make perfect; only PERFECT practice makes perfect.

Absolutely jks9199!

Cody no one here is trying to make you feel bad or also trying to diminish you. Instead we are trying to give you good, sound advice that could help you get to where you want to be some day. ie. a teacher!

 

[The Destroyer Style]

"Someone trained is better than someone not."

Not necessarily. If you train everyday in poor or ineffective ways, you won't be prepared for reality no matter how much you train. If your training destroys your body so that you can't rely on it when you need to, it's not.

Some years ago, several law enforcement officers were killed in a shootout. Their deaths triggered a number of changes in training. One of the changes was how reloading was done -- because several of them died with either neat piles of spent brass or spent brass in their pockets. Why'd that happen? In training on the range, they were required to pick up their brass. So, to save time and make it easier to clean up, they would either pile it neatly or put it in their pocket. And what'd they do under pressure? EXACTLY what they practiced -- which cost them vital seconds in a fire fight.

Or... as my teacher would say, you've been lied to all your life. Practice doesn't make perfect; only PERFECT practice makes perfect.

I see now, you mean that because of what they were did learn it killed them. They reacted only in that one way, because that was what they were used to. Its because what they were shown didn't cover a real life or death situation they died. I see your point now. I deffinately don't want that kind of result from anything. Thats why you guys have been saying even if they don't know anything it could do more harm then good. I'm sorry I have mis under stood your concerns. If I cause someon to react a certain way only it might get them killed.

I guess I kind of thought because I would react differently, that they would to. What you told me proves that a commen since thing to one person isn't to the rest. Is this the Hollywood fire fight wou are talking about? I was just wandering. I will stop trying to help people. I deffinately don't want something of that nature to happen to my friends. Why do you think they did that? Didn't they know they were in danger? Why didn't they instinctively know? I don't understand why they would waste time on that.

 

[shesulsa]

Some years ago, several law enforcement officers were killed in a shootout. Their deaths triggered a number of changes in training. One of the changes was how reloading was done -- because several of them died with either neat piles of spent brass or spent brass in their pockets. Why'd that happen? In training on the range, they were required to pick up their brass. So, to save time and make it easier to clean up, they would either pile it neatly or put it in their pocket. And what'd they do under pressure? EXACTLY what they practiced -- which cost them vital seconds in a fire fight.

I've heard a similar story about disarming a perp only to put the weapon right back in their hand. Disarming drills take A *TON* of practice to be even *remotely* effective and it usually goes something like this:

Opponent attacks with weapon
Officer defends and disarms
*repeat* <----this is where the officer would put the weapon back in the opponent's hand before the drill starts again

The drill is repeated again and again with increasing speed and intensity since ... you know, disarming drills take a TON of practice to be even remotely effective.

And in the field officers were getting hurt or worse doing as they trained - disarming and ... returning the weapon to the perp immediately.

These are not untrained people to be sure and they certainly have faced more than the average citizen is likely to face, so it's no joke.

:asian: