TMA and fighting.

[skribs]

They make that mistake on a couple of other techniques. Mind you, I'm fairly certain most of them wouldn't work, anyway (the wrist escape would work in the right situation, but she missed a couple of key points, making it clear she's never tried it with any resistance).

Is it that she did it wrong, or she's showing the basic technique and not going into every detail?

Another problem is one that's been discussed in other threads recently, that an actively resisting opponent who knows what you're going to do and when you're going to do it, is a lot different than some random guy grabbing you on the street.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I don't like the counter for the double hands neck choke at 3.00.

If your opponent wants to

- bend his arms, you should help him to bend more.
- straight his arms, you should help him to straight more.

In this clip the girl neither tries to bend her opponent's arms, nor tries to straight her opponent's arms.

an actively resisting opponent who knows what you're going to do and when you're going to do it, ...

You can always try to bend your opponent's arm. When he resists, you then try to straight his arm. Of course you can try the other way around too. This way even if your opponent may not commit on bending or straightening, you can force him to make that commitment.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Is it that she did it wrong, or she's showing the basic technique and not going into every detail?

Another problem is one that's been discussed in other threads recently, that an actively resisting opponent who knows what you're going to do and when you're going to do it, is a lot different than some random guy grabbing you on the street.

From my experience, she did it wrong. She left out a couple of key principles that make it ever workable against resistance. She's depending upon arm strength (rather than body strength and weight transfer) and not disrupting the structure of the attacker enough (in fact, leading into a strong area for him). Learning it without those principles takes just as much time and effort as learning it with them, and adds the complexity of having to re-learn it later. She also failed to protect against the other hand, but that could easily be something that was left out to demonstrate the basics.

Now, it is possible she knows some control tricks I don't. I allow that she could be using some hip pressure I don't know how to use (I had a jujutsu instructor do a hip throw to me that gave a new meaning to the term), but that would be awfully subtle for video training that seems directed at relative beginners.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't like the counter for the double hands neck choke at 3.00.

If your opponent wants to

- bend his arms, you should help him to bend more.
- straight his arms, you should help him to straight more.

In this clip the girl neither tries to bend her opponent's arms, nor tries to straight her opponent's arms.


You can always try to bend your opponent's arm. When he resists, you then try to straight his arm. Of course you can try the other way around too. This way even if your opponent may not commit on bending or straightening, you can force him to make that commitment.

Agreed. She didn't really seem to affect the arms much, at all, and that's the control point. And the knee was never going to make contact unless the attacker was stepping in or pulling her in (in the latter case, there wasn't time for the first move). You don't need much resistance - certainly not full resistance - to discover that part. But you do need a partner who won't let go until you make them, even if you do so gently.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

They make that mistake on a couple of other techniques. Mind you, I'm fairly certain most of them wouldn't work, anyway (the wrist escape would work in the right situation, but she missed a couple of key points, making it clear she's never tried it with any resistance).

Is it that she did it wrong, or she's showing the basic technique and not going into every detail?

Another problem is one that's been discussed in other threads recently, that an actively resisting opponent who knows what you're going to do and when you're going to do it, is a lot different than some random guy grabbing you on the street.

She did the technique wrong. Actually, she did it two different ways and the second one was more incorrect than the first one. I can recognize the move she is trying to do. Perhaps she saw it in a video or learned it in a class and got confused on the details.

I’ll distinguish two separate issues. The first is whether she got the basic mechanical steps correctly. I’d say she did no better than 60% on that front. The second is whether she demonstrates the subtle body mechanics necessary to make the technique work on a stronger assailant. She’s not even close on that aspect.

The MMA guys did fail to replicate what she was demonstrating, but in their defense, she didn’t actually explain any of the details.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

She didn't really seem to affect the arms much, at all, and that's the control point.

If she wants to

- bend her opponent's arm, she should press down on top of his elbow joint.
- straight her opponent's arm, she should control his wrist and then crack on his elbow joint.

If she holds both hands into a big fist and use it as a wedge to smash her opponent's arms from below, that can be a good move too.

 

[JowGaWolf]

While I actually agree with their assessment approach, they did a bad job of replicating the techniques. For the wrist grip escape, they actually used a different grip, blocking out the technique entirely. This is as bad in its own way as the "here's how we dominate a boxer" videos.

about to go to work. had to reply to this though. They really botch the wrist grab technique. They used the wrong grab as it wasn't the same that was in the video. They also used the wrong technique for that particular grab that they decided to test.

not cool - Mr demo guys.

 

[punisher73]

While I actually agree with their assessment approach, they did a bad job of replicating the techniques. For the wrist grip escape, they actually used a different grip, blocking out the technique entirely. This is as bad in its own way as the "here's how we dominate a boxer" videos.

I agree with their overall point, about certain things. BUT, a couple of things. First, if you KNOW what is coming it is easy to counter it. They set up a scenario that they knew exactly what the technique and counter were supposed to be and then did something to stop it. Second, there was no realism in their attacks in an attempt to counter it either. When watching the "block the punch and counter punch" technique. He keeps eating the punch, yet EVERY striking martial art teaches a technique like that. The guy throwing the punch isn't using any force in his right punch and is only focused on tagging him with a quick left punch to show the technique doesn't work.

Back to the original topic. TMA's and their katas were designed to defend against close range attacks, the kata are NOT designed against a sport style sparring match. Many styles try to do a sports style sparring and call it training for fighting and they lose a lot of what their style was designed for. On the other end of the spectrum, schools only do compliant partner drills from the kata and never put them in a more realistic situation.

For example, lapel grabs where the partner always grabs the uniform lightly and secures the grip before the partner does their technique. Oops sorry, didn't mean to pull your chest hair when I grabbed... There is no "intent" ever put into the technique. Don't get me started on watching punching counters that stop a foot from their face or are off to the side and you wouldn't have to do anything to avoid getting hit.

 

[dunc]

Hmmm I think that they went out to prove a point rather than trying to see if they could find SD techniques that work under pressure

 

[DanT]

I always found that for me and my students, 50% of fighting ability comes from physical fitness, 25% from hard sparring, and the last 25% comes from everything else. If you take an average Joe, make him ripped, give him amazing cardio, and make him as strong as a bull, he will improve significantly. Get him to spar hard frequently without teaching him anything, and he will further improve. From my experience, drills only unlock that last bit of skill that the person has by refining their movements. A majority of one's fighting ability comes from sparring and physical fitness.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I agree with their overall point, about certain things. BUT, a couple of things. First, if you KNOW what is coming it is easy to counter it. They set up a scenario that they knew exactly what the technique and counter were supposed to be and then did something to stop it.

I'd put things a bit differently. If you know a technique is coming, you can usually stop it either by applying a skilled counter or by opening yourself up for a different technique.

In this case the MMA guys did neither. In general, they actually gave the technique more chance to succeed than a real attacker would have - especially since they weren't dealing with the size disadvantage that a woman typically would have against a male attacker. They did fail to accurately replicate the demonstrated techniques a couple of times (especially with the wrist grab), but they did better than the average non-martial artist watching the "self-defense" video would have.

Hmmm I think that they went out to prove a point rather than trying to see if they could find SD techniques that work under pressure

Well, yeah. That's why they were picking on a video where the instructor displayed terrible technique and didn't know what she was doing.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I always found that for me and my students, 50% of fighting ability comes from physical fitness, 25% from hard sparring, and the last 25% comes from everything else. If you take an average Joe, make him ripped, give him amazing cardio, and make him as strong as a bull, he will improve significantly. Get him to spar hard frequently without teaching him anything, and he will further improve. From my experience, drills only unlock that last bit of skill that the person has by refining their movements. A majority of one's fighting ability comes from sparring and physical fitness.

I agree with the components, but not the distribution. I've worked with some very fit (in a few different measures) folks who weren't more than mediocre as fighters. They depended too much on their fitness and strength, and were quickly overcome by someone who didn't play their long game and/or pulled them away from their strength game. And I've seen guys who sparred too much, and did so with poor enough technique that someone who sparred less but was more technical could handle them nicely. There's also the issue that hard sparring will only ever have them practicing against what their partner decides to bring. Drills force them to practice against things their partner might not choose to use in sparring.

I think you have the right three pillars, but I also think they work together, rather than in steps. Increase fitness and technique, and let them practice it with resistance. One of three will bring problems. Two of three likely brings mediocrity. Over-emphasizing any one of them can limit development.

All that said, it'd be hard to over-emphasize fitness, except by getting to focused on strength and expecting it to overcome commensurate technique.

Now, to come back to your thoughts again - if the person has some natural aggression, technique matters less (a point I think @jobo has made before). And perhaps if the sparring includes some coaching (which means teaching them), then drills can move further back.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Second, there was no realism in their attacks in an attempt to counter it either. When watching the "block the punch and counter punch" technique. He keeps eating the punch, yet EVERY striking martial art teaches a technique like that. The guy throwing the punch isn't using any force in his right punch and is only focused on tagging him with a quick left punch to show the technique doesn't work.

They probably didn't want to get a concussion. If they had the attacker come in full force and applied the defense as poorly as the woman in the video did, the defender would have gotten hurt.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

They probably didn't want to get a concussion. If they had the attacker come in full force and applied the defense as poorly as the woman in the video did, the defender would have gotten hurt.

One thing I didn't see them do is vary the attack to see if there was a point where the technique actually made sense. There are responses that make much more sense on a rape choke being pushed back than on a static one (which is probably the least realistic version). Static rape chokes also tend to lead to unnaturally stiff arms - just holding them at arm's-length and choking, which blocks out a bunch of techniques that are available when the arms are active.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

One thing I didn't see them do is vary the attack to see if there was a point where the technique actually made sense. There are responses that make much more sense on a rape choke being pushed back than on a static one (which is probably the least realistic version). Static rape chokes also tend to lead to unnaturally stiff arms - just holding them at arm's-length and choking, which blocks out a bunch of techniques that are available when the arms are active.

Yeah if they were actually searching for something of value in new techniques, they would need to do a lot more careful experimentation. In this case I think they had enough experience to tell that the instructor didn't know what she was doing, so they didn't bother.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Or just as bad talking about what did happen.

So I was in a fight once and this worked. Or the Cowby, Astronaut, Marines train this.

So now every can drill this with confidence that in a fight this escape will work.

And of course if it doesn't work in training that was probably due to some sort of theoretical issue that will not occur in a real fight. So we will still consider this technique as working.

Yeah. I wouldn't do that in a real fight either. Here's why. If someone tries to flip on me, I would have a lot of options to counter that flip. I could change height, move forward, backwards, or side to side. I could twist my body while the person is in the air, I can push and let go, I can push and strike, or I can strike or do any combination of the movements in strike. I could even sweep the arms as he's about to plant his hands on the ground. Any of these would disrupt the mechanics needed to do that flip. You can pretty much do anything to a body when it's in the air.

The one thing I wouldn't do is allow this guy to use my body as a root.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Here's the follow-up:

 

[JowGaWolf]

They make that mistake on a couple of other techniques. Mind you, I'm fairly certain most of them wouldn't work, anyway (the wrist escape would work in the right situation, but she missed a couple of key points, making it clear she's never tried it with any resistance).

Yeah the techniques she was using were not applied correctly or were used against an attack where there are better options. I'm always happy to do a foot stop so long as I'm facing my opponent and have a good visual of that allows me to target the foot.

A foot stomp to counter a bear hug is a good way to be "ragged dolled"

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here's the follow-up:

A bit better, though he still doesn't follow up. He does the one response, and the attacker gets to continue with absolutely anything. It's the demonstration fallacy used in reverse. For instance, the wrist release did its job in spite of the errors - the grip failed partway through. He just failed to do anything about the rest of the attacks.

Of course, the original instruction failed to even suggest there would be variation of responses, so maybe that's a fair response to an overly simplified instruction. I could see some of those as beginners' drills, but they need a demonstration (at some speed) that shows the mechanics properly.

Part of the issue with his analysis is that pretty much every combat training uses fixed-response drills, and he ignores that. If someone is going to learn a single-leg takedown, they are going to start by being fed a rather specific single attack that positions the "attacker" for the takedown. You don't start with chaos - you teach movement from a limited drill then expand those skills and principles to the chaos.

He does make a good point about a lot of the situational stuff being too focused. IMO, that stuff should be used to work on getting to the key positions and create openings for the core of what you do.That should be the point of situational training - to work on the transitions from situations.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah the techniques she was using were not applied correctly or were used against an attack where there are better options. I'm always happy to do a foot stop so long as I'm facing my opponent and have a good visual of that allows me to target the foot.

A foot stomp to counter a bear hug is a good way to be "ragged dolled"

If they aren't lifting (perhaps intending to drag?), a foot stomp might be available. It's not going to stop them, though, and she doesn't seem to understand the purpose - mostly intended to get him to move his foot to make room for your movement and limit his ability to lift well. It gets your foot back (so your weight forward) and his foot back (so maybe some clearance). Failure mode for that is rarely looked at - it would mean his foot doesn't move back and you may or may not be standing on his foot. Have to know what openings you'll have from that point, or the original move is too risky.