'The Straight Dope' on usefullness of MAT

[Uchinanchu]

Thought that this might make for an interesting read for those interested in the statistical data of martial arts effectiveness in actual encounters reported.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns...-training-ever-helped-anybody-defeat-a-mugger

Personally, I found it interesting to hear that a high percentage of cases involved blind/older people successfully defending themselves! Any thoughts/ stories anyone would like to share?

Yoroshiku

 

[Phoenix44]

'Generalizing from anecdotes is a temptation we need to resist, of course.'

That pretty much says it all, I think.

 

[jks9199]

How do you measure muggings or other attacks prevented due to better awareness, or higher confidence that deters the attack? Or attacks that are dealt with and never reported to the press or police?

The question is hard to answer because there are too many unclear variables.

 

[BLACK LION]

To me its less about any perceived training and more about a core will to survive and the intent to stop at nothing until that path is forged... right then and there... without that sheer will to stop at nothing and the intent to forge your own reality then training means nothing in a survival setting...
If you look at some of the details it shows one man beating a man with the butt of the pistol... takes no training to do that...
being combative starts with the will... the will to survive... and then the intent to see that goal realized no matter what.... then comes the training... but sometimes its as simple as a rock to the head....

 

[Deaf Smith]

A recent ten-year study of attacks on women (733 rapes, 1,278 sexual assaults, and 12,235 general assaults) found that on the one hand, resisting an attempted rape lowered the odds of the perp completing the act by nearly two-thirds. But on the other, it slightly increased the odds of injury and doubled the chance of serious injury.

What it didn't tell was what were the chances of being seriously injured. If it was low to begin with then a doubleing is no biggie.

A study of 3,206 assaults against women between 1992 and 1995 showed that women who fought back early in the attack were half as likely to be injured, and 75 percent of women queried reported that fighting back helped. An earlier study using data from the 70s found that women who resisted had less likelihood of being raped and 86 percent sustained no serious injury as a result — which, I suppose, means 14 percent did sustain serious injury.

Then that indicates if you can fight back... fight back!

Another ten-year study of victim response in 27,595 crimes (assault, sexual assault, robbery, larceny, and burglary) showed across the board that resisting resulted in less injury than not resisting. Similarly, studies have found that resisting reduces the likelihood of an attempted crime succeeding. For example, the chance of a would-be robber pulling it off drops somewhere between 20 and 48 percent.

To do or not to do is up to the individual. There are no guarantees! But as long as you can fight, and it's not suicide to try, then resisting would see to be the way.

Deaf

 

[sgtmac_46]

That pretty much says it all, I think.

I'll agree with that........but he also says 'But there isn't much else to go on.'

So I guess if a few anecdotes is the best evidence we got.......they'll have to do until someone shows up with better.

 

[sgtmac_46]

What it didn't tell was what were the chances of being seriously injured. If it was low to begin with then a doubleing is no biggie.

Exactly.....'Slight increase' is nebulous.......'decrease by 2/3' is pretty concrete.

Then that indicates if you can fight back... fight back!

Agreed.

To do or not to do is up to the individual. There are no guarantees! But as long as you can fight, and it's not suicide to try, then resisting would see to be the way.

Deaf

It would appear that it's generally better to resist if one can......that doesn't guarantee a positive outcome, but in crisis situations there is no guarantee of a positive outcome........only percentages.

 

[Em MacIntosh]

My combative outlook is that if someone is attempting violence on me, they want to kill me or worse. I mould my martial arts training to fit me, not the other way around. What I call the tussle (I'm not 100% sure if "infighting" is the correct word) is very unfamiliar to my karate training but second nature to my dad's punishing wrestling lessons. At kicking and punching range though my kickboxing and karate are ingrained into my muscle memory and seem more effective than if I had no training at all. I also found my karate training made me stronger and more fit in general and this helped me do better against my dad. I know a kid from high school who never took martial arts a day in hs life. He's not big or intimidating but I've seen few able to hit without getting hit, take advantage of feints or openings and get out of holds and avoid punishment like this guy. Never sen him fight for real but two of us couldn't take him sparring. That's got to say something for natural ability.

 

[chinto]

ok folks, here is my .2 cents worth. any good hand to hand systems training will tend to help you carry yourself as a non victim ... that right there stops a lot of problems... that said if you end up in an encounter, how well you have trained will make a huge difference. my instructor has had a few encounters over about 35 years. I can say that his training kept him alive and uninjured. I have had a few encounters with a lot less training then i have now. I survived and more becouse of that. I have to say in at least 2 encounters I would provably not have survived with out the training i had then.

 

[seasoned]

I have seen people with a lot of training, and little will, go down. On the other hand I have also seen people with very little training, but a rock hard will to survive, kick butt. Training is good, but it all boils down to what you are willing to stand up for, give anybody a good enough reason, and training is secondary.

 

[Flea]

An earlier study using data from the 70s found that women who resisted had less likelihood of being raped and 86 percent sustained no serious injury as a result —

It's not what the author meant, but I have a big problem with the implications of this wording. To me, "no serious injuries" suggests that the only fallout from rape is physical, which trivializes the crime. It impacts all aspects of the victim's life, and making a statement like the above in a public forum is an insult to the victims and a danger to public safety as perpetrators may seize on it as an excuse to continue their activities.

:soapbox:


That said, I understand that resisting tends to help rape victims with the psychological aftermath ... and that's worth its weight in gold.