The problem with "traditional" martial arts part 3

[TSDTexan]

I would like to add another element which is that of rules...

pre 1743 and the Jack Broughton rules, boxing, or bare knuckle prize fighting, consisted of grappling techniques, throws, arm locks, chokes and kicks and included rules like continuing until one man could no longer carry on (there were also quarterstaff and short sword rounds as well interestingly enough, together with their eerily similar man sau stance).... anyway Jack Broughton due to killing a man, brought in safety rules and gloves and then the Marquess of Queensbury Rules came in, in 1867 making boxing even safer and more sport-man like.

Boxing now has huge developments in scientific advances in training and understanding, but would a champion bare knuckle prize fighter win against a champion contemporary boxer in a street fight, in my view I think they probably would, but I think the bare knuckle boxer would probably lose in a boxing match with gloves on if forced to abide to the contemporary rules. (please no-one mention the Mcgregor-Mayweather match, as I am still disappointed I paid to watch that).

So there is an element of framing going on.... I am not peddaling out the old "wing chun is too deadly to ever work in a competitive environment" but I am saying that advances are sometimes only good for turning a fighting system into a sport and increasing that sports entertainment value and safety. I may be wrong but I think something similar may have resulted in the emergence of Judo from Jujutsu.

Anyways...So in the UK fights are common on most Saturday nights, maybe its because no-one has guns, I don't know... anyway things you regularly see in a standard drunken fight are things which are directly listed as fouls in MMA rules:

• Head-butting

• Biting or spitting at an opponent

• Hair pulling

• Eye gouging of any kind

• Groin attacks

• Downward pointing of elbow strikes

• Clawing, pinching, twisting the flesh

• Kicking the head of a grounded opponent etc.etc.

From the MMA schools I have seen, they don't train for this in their sparring, maybe cause its against the rules, again I don't know. But what I do know is that these rules are not making MMA better more efficient and more effective, they are turning it more into a sport. If more rules come in, MMA will become more of a sport, safer and more entertaining. Which is fine, but when I read stuff about MMA leading to being the ultimate fighter or ultimate fighting technique...

I think you would need to strip all the rules out to get there.

 

[Martial D]

Oodles. Together with a few fights on the weekend, even have a scar on my arm from a broken bottle slash. I see my view does not fit with yours, so I must be wrong. I thought TMA practitioners were supposed to be the blinkered ones.

Blinkered? Lol not hardly.

I'm just not convinced that being aware of fouls while in a cage would be a game changer for when you are not. I have given my reasoning for that, and objections that relate to surprise attacks or what can work against untrained opponents aren't really relevant.

The initial argument was that the inclusion of MMA fouls in an MMA fight against a trained fighter wouldn't make much difference as per the outcome. I'm still not convinced otherwise.

 

[Poppity]

Blinkered? Lol not hardly.

I'm just not convinced that being aware of fouls while in a cage would be a game changer for when you are not. I have given my reasoning for that, and objections that relate to surprise attacks or what can work against untrained opponents aren't really relevant.

The initial argument was that the inclusion of MMA fouls in an MMA fight against a trained fighter wouldn't make much difference as per the outcome. I'm still not convinced otherwise.

Fair points. I just wanted to move the thread on to "the problem with MMA" as I fancied a change from defence.

 

[Anarax]

Where for myself...and I hesitate to write this but..my objective is to kill, to take someone's life.

The main objective for most people is to defend themselves by neutralizing the threat and surviving the encounter. There needs to be some correlation between the use of force and the given threat. Meaning if someone grabs my wrist and they have no visible weapons, but I pull my firearm and shoot them, that's going to be a problem through the eyes of the courts.

'm at an age in my life where bar fights are not going to happen anymore.

The bar isn't the only place you could encounter a physical confrontation though. Driving to the store, going to work, walking your dog taking or even walking to your mailbox are all situations where you might encounter physical confrontations. Unless you completely remove yourself from the world, physical confrontations are still a moderate probability.

My force continuum starts with two bullets center mass, then decreases from there two my knife. Yes I carry a knife from the time I wake till I undress for bed, then unarmed fighting. I can reduce the force from there if needed but the common training is for worst case.

I disagree with that training methodology. Focusing mostly on worst case scenarios can have inherit problems. Defending against punches, takedowns, grabs, etc, is just as important. The probability of the scenario should play a factor in how you prioritize them. Being assault/battered is much more likely than being shot, just look at the criminal statistics. That's not to say don't train for worst case, but there should be more of a balance.

So when I say look for other options or a different kind of win, this is why. my starting point is too high.

Your starting point will change depending on the situation though. Lethal force won't always be justified.

To back off from there to a lower intensity lends itself to some issues.

Could you elaborate?

so you and Drop Bear are in a bar you get in a physical fight with someone and how does that end? how do you see the win? did you knock him out? ok let go with that.....then what? THEN WHAT? how does that win taste? do you think your going to go home and enjoy your dinner with your wife and kids and that was the end of it? yeah sometimes that is the end of it,,except when its not the end of it.well guess what..the dude had a few friends there and they got your name. 5 minutes of Google -fu and facebook and the dude knows where you live and do you think he is just gonna let things be? nope hes gonna return it back 10 fold. he shows up at your house and the door bell rings...ding dong, guess who mother F"er and he blows a hole though the back of the head of who ever answers, because he wants you to suffer he doesnt care who it is.
how does that win taste now?

Possibility and probability are important when dealing with MA/SD training. Could that happen? Yes. Will that happen? Very unlikely. The only thing we can do is deal with the threats the world throws at us one at a time while maintaining a reasonable awareness of our actions. If we start over analyzing all the possible outcomes in the future then we would never act. You could legally and lawfully defend yourself, but still might be charged and tried for assault/battery. However, the probable outcome of being charged(much more probable than your scenario) shouldn't hinder me from deciding to defend myself.

 

[TSDTexan]

Hey there.

I do believe you may have missed a few points of context.

On headbutts: the point is that if you don't have grappling skills, it isn't a very high percentage move without them. So to say you would win if only you could headbutt is a bit of a red herring if you can't already grapple.

On biting: firstly, Bruce Lee was an actor, not a fighter. AFAIK there is no evidence he ever fought anyone. Sure it can cause pain, but it won't stop anyone. To say not being able to bite inhibits ones fighting ability raises questions about ones skill set.

The same can be said for hair pulling. If you don't already know how to grapple, or against someone that does, it won't add or subtract much.

On groin kicking: again, this is in the context of an opponent that knows how to fight. If you can't reliably land inside leg kicks, you also won't land groin kicks. They are pretty much the same kick, only the latter presents a much smaller target.

The ultimate point here is that these are suplimental techniques. If you don't already have good grappling, striking, and distance control, these things won't help much /against a trained fighter/.

Yes all of these things can and will work on drunken bar schlubs. So will anything though.

There is evidence for two fights as an 18 year old Bruce Lee, and again within 2 years after.

Yoichi Nakachi (1932-1998) vs Bruce Lee, location Downtown Seattle YMCA handball/racquetball court.
Year 1959 or 1960.

This fight was witnessed by numerous people
But Jesse Glover, and Ed Hart have put this fight on the record repeatedly.

I had only known Bruce for a few months, and he had repeatedly amazed me with the stuff he’d shown me, but had never seen him in a fight before, and I think everyone there was stunned by it. This guy was lying there flat on his back, and I just stood there staring at him. I was absolutely dumbfounded! Finally, the guys got together and dragged the karate guy over to a wall and sort of leaned him up against it. They didn’t think it was a good idea to try to stand him up.

After a while, his eyelids fluttered and he opened his eyes, looked up at me, and said ‘How long did it take him to defeat me? I knew how long it was — it was 11 seconds — but I looked at this poor guy, and I just didn’t have the heart to tell him. So I doubled the time, and I said to him ‘Uh, 22 seconds.’ And the guy groaned ‘Aaaah’ and fell back unconscious again! I’ll never forget that.

— Ed Hart
“Was Bruce Lee a Good Fighter, or Simply a Good Talker?”
Black Belt magazine (Nov 1993)

Here is video recorded testimony of Jesse Glover, And Ed Hart.

Prior to that When Bruce was 18 years old, at the 1958 Hong Kong Inter-School Amateur Boxing Championships he defeated three time champion Gary Elms by knock out.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Focusing mostly on worst case scenarios can have inherit problems.

As long as you can show your opponent that you are not that easy to be beaten up, most people will give up.

For example,

1. Conservative approach - None of his punches can land on your body (show your defense skill).
2. Aggressive approach - You strong clinch prevent him from moving (show your strength).

Both methods have been proved to work in bar environment and end up "both persons live happily ever after".

 

[drop bear]

Well, it just has to work.

When you convert a martial art into a combative sport a lot of crippling and killing techniques get dropped from the class syllabus.

yes, pressure testing is still required. no you don't have to maim or kill your partner.

Crippling and killing techniques are developed by learning to perform martial arts in real time with real feedback.

Being able to combat sport will almost always improve your ability to cripple/ kill.

 

[Martial D]

There is evidence for two fights as an 18 year old Bruce Lee, and again within 2 years after.

Yoichi Nakachi (1932-1998) vs Bruce Lee, location Downtown Seattle YMCA handball/racquetball court.
Year 1959 or 1960.

This fight was witnessed by numerous people
But Jesse Glover, and Ed Hart have put this fight on the record repeatedly.

I had only known Bruce for a few months, and he had repeatedly amazed me with the stuff he’d shown me, but had never seen him in a fight before, and I think everyone there was stunned by it. This guy was lying there flat on his back, and I just stood there staring at him. I was absolutely dumbfounded! Finally, the guys got together and dragged the karate guy over to a wall and sort of leaned him up against it. They didn’t think it was a good idea to try to stand him up.

After a while, his eyelids fluttered and he opened his eyes, looked up at me, and said ‘How long did it take him to defeat me? I knew how long it was — it was 11 seconds — but I looked at this poor guy, and I just didn’t have the heart to tell him. So I doubled the time, and I said to him ‘Uh, 22 seconds.’ And the guy groaned ‘Aaaah’ and fell back unconscious again! I’ll never forget that.

— Ed Hart
“Was Bruce Lee a Good Fighter, or Simply a Good Talker?”
Black Belt magazine (Nov 1993)

Here is video recorded testimony of Jesse Glover, And Ed Hart.

Prior to that When Bruce was 18 years old, at the 1958 Hong Kong Inter-School Amateur Boxing Championships he defeated three time champion Gary Elms by knock out.
View attachment 21603

Ok. I'll grant you 'anecdotal evidence' There is a lot of Bruce Lee hype just as there are those that benefit financially to this day from having known him, so I tend to take such anecdotes with a grain of salt.

 

[Anarax]

As long as you can show your opponent that you are not that easy to be beaten up, most people will give up.

For example,

1. Conservative approach - None of his punches can land on your body (show your defense skill).
2. Aggressive approach - You strong clinch prevent him from moving (show your strength).

Both methods have been proved to work in bar environment and end up "both persons live happily ever after".

My preference is solving a confrontation with the least amount of force as possible. Unfortunately the use of force required to neutralize the threat is mostly dependent on the attacker. The more committed the attacker the more force will be required to neutralize the threat.

 

[drop bear]

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I understand you did security. However, that doesn't equate you seeking out conflict, security is mostly about deterrence and prevention. I was asking did you go out and look for fights?

Security is looking for fights. You see a scumbag and instead of avoiding him or going home. You go out of your way to approach him and then kick him out.

The next time you have a problem with a guy. Kick him out of wherever he is. See if that is starting a fight.

 

[drop bear]

Hey,

I am going to disagree about me not getting the context but it's the internet and disagreement is what is all about.

Headbutts work standing up as a surprise attack

Bites can make someone release their grip as a last resort.

Hair pulling can open the neck up for attack.

Fishhooking is nasty and fighting with gloves is for sports.

Kneeing anyone in the nuts even if their trained is easy if your close They will not even see it. But it is not entertaining for sports.

The ultimate point for me, is MMA is limited by the rules and is effective as a sport, but it does not utilise or train for a variety of techniques.

The issues addressed in OPs post are not street vs sport though.

It is more about unrealistic training leading to an unrealistic assessment.

Training illegal techniques in a vacuum as some sort of get out of jail free card is where the mindset breaks down.

There is a whole bunch of risk reward issues you haven't considered here.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Do you sell drugs or owe money?

Because they are about the only people I know who have ever been home invaded.

Unfortunately I’ve known a few ordinary (very few, but a few) folks who had home invasions. Likely (never caught, so not proven) by folks in that first category.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

My preference is solving a confrontation with the least amount of force as possible.

Agree!

- Your opponent punches you with his right hand. You use left hand to grab on his right arm.
- He uses left hand to punch you. You use right hand to grab on his left arm.
- You pin his left arm on his own right arm and against his chest.
- You then ask him, "Can we be friend now?"
- If he says yes, you let him go.
- If he says no, you then ...

Problem can be solved without fist meets face.

 

[hoshin1600]

@Anarax thoughtful post, thanks for that.

The main objective for most people is to defend themselves by neutralizing the threat and surviving the encounter.

seems logical but if i look at what and how people train that idea is not obvious to me. what people say is often wishful thinking while what they actually do gives a more accurate picture of their intentions.

There needs to be some correlation between the use of force and the given threat.

oh of course, i have an entire lecture on use of force and the law but that wasnt in the scope of the thread.

The bar isn't the only place you could encounter a physical confrontation though.

agreed, but it has happened in the past that if i start to try and define things too much and parse out specifics the conversation gets bogged down in menusha.

Focusing mostly on worst case scenarios can have inherit problems

i would like to hear your thoughts on this.

The probability of the scenario should play a factor in how you prioritize them.

fair enough, but if you follow that logic out it gets flawed at the fringes, the most common scenario is a heated argument. under this premise we would spend the entire class practicing de-escalation. in fact the probability of ever needing your martial art training is so close to zero that we would be better off in a knitting class.
there is utility in focusing training time on high probability attacks, i think it was Patrick McCarthy who is a proponent of the HAPV theory. there is a difference between training for scenario and training for skills. i think your seeing this as an either / or situation and it doesnt have to be. training for a good position is training for a good position. bar fight or deadly interaction is a matter of intensity not of applying different skill sets.

Your starting point will change depending on the situation though. Lethal force won't always be justified.

agreed. but my usage was more conceptual and about training not application.

If we start over analyzing all the possible outcomes in the future then we would never act. the probable outcome of being charged(much more probable than your scenario) shouldn't hinder me from deciding to defend myself.
.

again, this was a specific response to a specific comment and was meant as allegory not literal. it seems this went right over peoples heads.

 

[hoshin1600]

To back off from there to a lower intensity lends itself to some issues.
Could you elaborate?

i follow three principals for a combative event.

• surprise
• speed
• violence of action

this means i attack fast, hard and with as much ferocity as i can without sacrificing integrity, when you least expect it. the level of violence has to be equal or greater than what the other person can muster. most people are not emotionally prepared for sudden intense violence. this has to be trained for and your mental system works better if your inoculated to receive and deal with that level of violence. its my belief that you can train at that intensity and lower the intensity when needed. you can moderate to a lower level easier then the other way around. the common martial art school never rises to that level. most dojos have an atmosphere as if its a social hour. i have seen so many dojos where the sparring is so relaxed and non violent. then a new student will come in and they will "tone it down" for the new guy. they are so far down on the spectrum they would just panic and freeze in a real situation. to Drop Bears credit he is constantly hopping all over people because he knows full well his normal level of intensity for sparring would overwhelm most martial arts practitioners. its like night and day and those who are in low level intensity training dont see it.

 

[Buka]

Most people are not emotionally prepared for sudden intense violence. This has to be trained for and your mental system works better if your inoculated to receive and deal with that level of violence. It's my belief that you can train at that intensity and lower the intensity when needed. You can moderate to a lower level easier then the other way around. The common martial art school never rises to that level. Most dojos have an atmosphere as if its a social hour. .

That pretty much sums up everything I believe about the world of Karate, not just today, but throughout my lifetime.

 

[Buka]

Question....

You're a Martial Arts instructor. Teaching whatever. In your travels somebody shows you something that's the greatest thing you've seen in the Arts. Maybe it's a technique, a partner drill, an escape, a reversal, a punch, kick whatever. But it's really awesome.

But it is not part of your traditional art.

Do you teach it to your students? And if you do, does that mean you are no longer teaching a traditional Art?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Question....

You're a Martial Arts instructor. Teaching whatever. In your travels somebody shows you something that's the greatest thing you've seen in the Arts. Maybe it's a technique, a partner drill, an escape, a reversal, a punch, kick whatever. But it's really awesome.

But it is not part of your traditional art.

Do you teach it to your students? And if you do, does that mean you are no longer teaching a traditional Art?

MA can be as simple as

- how to enter, and
- how to finish.

If you have a goal, to find a path to reach it should be easy. As long as a certain path can help you to reach to your goal, you should not care whether that path come from your MA system or not.

There are many preying mantis combos that can be perfectly integrated into the throwing art.

For example, The preying mantis Gou Lou Cai Shou can be used as:

- Right hand block and grab on your opponent's forearm.
- Left hand push on his elbow joint.
- Right hand move to his neck.

 

[Buka]

MA can be as simple as

- how to enter, and
- how to finish.

If you have a goal, to find a path to reach it should be easy. As long as a certain path can help you to reach to your goal, you should not care whether that path come from your MA system or not.

I agree. But that didn't answer my question.

 

[hoshin1600]

Question....

You're a Martial Arts instructor. Teaching whatever. In your travels somebody shows you something that's the greatest thing you've seen in the Arts. Maybe it's a technique, a partner drill, an escape, a reversal, a punch, kick whatever. But it's really awesome.

But it is not part of your traditional art.

Do you teach it to your students? And if you do, does that mean you are no longer teaching a traditional Art?

Well the story I got was that Uechi-ryu didn't have a round kick until someone saw Bruce Lee doing it in the movies. And we thought...gee that looks pretty cool..and the rest is history
Not sure if it's true but it speaks to your question.