To Control Or Not To Control..That Is The Question.

[MJS]

How about youtube? Perhaps a short clip would aid in what you're trying to describe.

 

[MJS]

There is no way to explain this thru typing... it must be demonstrated and what works will show as well as what does not.... I end up getting frustrated over these threads becuase my position cannot be made clear thru physical evidence... I am much better at physically showing than trying to articualte the physiology behind the action...
We go over this stuff every week and we attempt everything that is discussed here and trust me... most things just dont work.
I know what I type may not makes the best of sense to most but it does to some.... I do try but I do understand that these things must be physically expressed in order to show their true merit of lack thereof...

I am ex-military... the guys I train with are either military affiliated or bunkinkan affiliated... We train every imagineable approach with or without tools in hopes to dispell any myths associated... the sole purpose of our training is to find what works and what does not...
These topics help me get a better idea of where things are at in this realm of combat and I can calibrate and adjust accordingly....

All I can say is wether or not it makes sense or translates into something practical here in this forum is irrelevant compared to wether it works on a living breathing resisting human....
We try and test as many methods and approaches as we can muster... but only train the stuff that works

Well, if most things don't work, then that tells me that the 1 and only true art that will ever works is what you do. I'm sorry to say though, that there are many arts, as well as people, who are advocating the things that I am, but I suppose we're all wrong as well.

If what YOU do works for YOU, that is fine. What I do works for me. Put up a youtube clip showing your method, and how not taking any control of the weapon works, providing your partner is really trying to attack you, and perhaps I will reconsider my views. Until then, I stand by what I train. I just dont see how not controlling a weapon, and assuming that you're going to hit the magic spots, will work, all the while the BG is swinging a blade at you.

I still think that you're slightly misunderstanding here. There is NO reason why you can't still take the person out, while you're controlling the arm, hand, etc.

 

[Jenna]

Hey Mike I want to thank you for your input and for the thread itself. Also, I hope I am not sounding argumentative, if so I promise I do not mean to at all

Again, don't misunderstand the term 'grapple' as in this case, I'm not referring to focusing all your energy on the weapon. We as martial artists, have a wide array of things to do. However, there is no magic hit. I dont care what anyone says. If there was a magic shot, everyone would just train that 1 shot. This is why MMAists, laugh at TMAists, because they get a kick out of the TMA guy talking about "The Deadly" eye gouge, groin shot, etc. Yes, those are good targets, but to think that they're fight enders...nope, I'm not buying it. As I said in another post in another thread....its not the shot but the accumulation of hits that matters. Additionally, target availability will dictate what we can do.

I agree, there is no magic one-shot-kill strike. If there were, it would be both lucky (to have ended the attack) and but also unfortunate for us (having to deal with the fallout non-Hollywood reality if eg. that trachea crush that we did manage to execute on our attacker was fatal). And but I am not referring to such a deftly placed shuto-type strike or whatever, instead when I refer to a single strike / single lock, I mean that if we have set our mind ahead of time to disarm the opponent, AND WE FAIL with our first attempt, then we are left to deal with his counter(s). He may be a "waver" and an idle threatener and we get another chance, and but to imagine for a minute that we can take a few slashes or punctures before we go down is to me, unrealistic. Yes, of course we can strike and strike again, yet those are not odds I would care to play against the armed attacker.

Mike, I am not disagreeing with you here, no sir, not at all. I am just saying that the disarm may work. And but it may not before we have sustained unrecoverable damage. My view is simply NOT to have made a prior determination whether to disarm or take down. I would just try to exhort everybody to maintain flexibility - as you say yourself, target availability dictates everything - we will not know that until we are right there in it. If I make up my mind here and now to ALWAYS go for disarm, then I might miss the opportunity to lock down the attacker as he draws out the weapon. And vice versa - if I make up my mind now to ALWAYS attempt to neutralise the attacker himself, then I might miss the simple trick of gaining his outstretched weapon off him.

Again, I promise I am not arguing with your disarm / follow-up methodology no sir, I am just saying that I choose not to have a plan EITHER WAY ahead of time and ahead of knowing what I am faced with

Back to option 1 for a moment. I'm not a track star, so if I take off running, its possible, unless I really stunned this guy, he may come after me. Now we're back to square 1 with having to deal with the blade. Also, if I'm with someone who isn't capable of running or running as fast, I'm not leaving that person to save my own tail. Therefore, I'm forced to stay and fight.

Yes, I am not exactly Flo-jo either and I appreciate that it is not always possible, or even prudent to run from the scenario (esp if we are accompanied by a "non-lethal" friend etc). Nonetheless, THAT would be my ultimate plan in an armed attack. 1. Execute my single tech to EITHER disarm or disable and 2. extract myself by hook or by crook. If I have failed #1 then #2 becomes even more crucial. I am not a grappler in ANY sense. Even were I, I would not trade blows with a knife carrier, no way, let alone chance it with a gunman. I have not enough blood in me I think. I am not a stand up toughass fighter. My only aim is my safety and potentially someone I would be with.

And again, I am just trying to put my approach. I am not for a minute suggesting it is right for anyone else As you say, we all do what we think best based on our experience Thank you again for putting your points so clearly
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

 

[matt.m]

However, unless the arm or hand is struck in such a fashion as to make the badguy drop the knife, you're going to need control prior to the disarm, no?

Just another opinion of control....we dont need to spend 10min playing with the hand. Once its grabbed, either the arm, hand, etc., we should start working for the disarm.

I see your point man, however, most people when looking for a disarm get too focused on the 1 particular knife or broken bottle, etc. etc. and it doesn't end well. I did a research paper in college on it. I used sources from military tactics and law enforcement stuff.

 

[MJS]

Hey Mike I want to thank you for your input and for the thread itself. Also, I hope I am not sounding argumentative, if so I promise I do not mean to at all

No worries Jenna. You're not sounding like that at all.

I agree, there is no magic one-shot-kill strike. If there were, it would be both lucky (to have ended the attack) and but also unfortunate for us (having to deal with the fallout non-Hollywood reality if eg. that trachea crush that we did manage to execute on our attacker was fatal). And but I am not referring to such a deftly placed shuto-type strike or whatever, instead when I refer to a single strike / single lock, I mean that if we have set our mind ahead of time to disarm the opponent, AND WE FAIL with our first attempt, then we are left to deal with his counter(s). He may be a "waver" and an idle threatener and we get another chance, and but to imagine for a minute that we can take a few slashes or punctures before we go down is to me, unrealistic. Yes, of course we can strike and strike again, yet those are not odds I would care to play against the armed attacker.

Seeing that we're dealing with deadly force, we'd probably be justified in using it against the other person, but then again, no matter what we do, this guy could hire a lawyer to paint him as a fine, upstanding citizen, and attempt to sue us. But thats another thread.

As for the disarm...I see what you're saying. For me, thats secondary to control, but again, thats just me. As for whatever the BG is doing to us...I suppose the same can apply to empty hand attacks as well. If someone grabs us, and we begin our tech. for that grab, but he suddenly punches with the other hand or lets go, etc., we should hopefully be able to just adapt to that situation. IMO, thats the ultimate goal.

As far as getting cut...like I said before, we probably will, but for me, I want to minimize as much as possible and I dont feel that can be done without control.

Mike, I am not disagreeing with you here, no sir, not at all. I am just saying that the disarm may work. And but it may not before we have sustained unrecoverable damage. My view is simply NOT to have made a prior determination whether to disarm or take down. I would just try to exhort everybody to maintain flexibility - as you say yourself, target availability dictates everything - we will not know that until we are right there in it. If I make up my mind here and now to ALWAYS go for disarm, then I might miss the opportunity to lock down the attacker as he draws out the weapon. And vice versa - if I make up my mind now to ALWAYS attempt to neutralise the attacker himself, then I might miss the simple trick of gaining his outstretched weapon off him.

Please dont feel as if you have to agree with me. If everyone agreed with each other, this place would be pretty darn boring. LOL. Like I said, I'm looking for control, counter strikes and then, a break, disarm, whatever. Just like empty hand techs., there are many weapon techs as well. IMO, as we progress in our training, we shouldn't be focused so much on techniques, but instead the principles and concepts that they're teaching us. I may choose to parry/block/strike the arm and counter strike, turn around and get the heck out of there. If thats the case, then no disarm is done.

Again, I promise I am not arguing with your disarm / follow-up methodology no sir, I am just saying that I choose not to have a plan EITHER WAY ahead of time and ahead of knowing what I am faced with

Agreed. Its pretty hard to predict whats going to happen, so thats why I suggested just rolling with whatever is presented to you at the moment, and be flexable enough to roll with the changes.

Yes, I am not exactly Flo-jo either and I appreciate that it is not always possible, or even prudent to run from the scenario (esp if we are accompanied by a "non-lethal" friend etc). Nonetheless, THAT would be my ultimate plan in an armed attack. 1. Execute my single tech to EITHER disarm or disable and 2. extract myself by hook or by crook. If I have failed #1 then #2 becomes even more crucial. I am not a grappler in ANY sense. Even were I, I would not trade blows with a knife carrier, no way, let alone chance it with a gunman. I have not enough blood in me I think. I am not a stand up toughass fighter. My only aim is my safety and potentially someone I would be with.

And again, I am just trying to put my approach. I am not for a minute suggesting it is right for anyone else As you say, we all do what we think best based on our experience Thank you again for putting your points so clearly
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

You're welcome and thank you for posting your thoughts as well.

 

[BLACK LION]

Well, if most things don't work, then that tells me that the 1 and only true art that will ever works is what you do. I'm sorry to say though, that there are many arts, as well as people, who are advocating the things that I am, but I suppose we're all wrong as well. Inaccurate statement and somewhat cheap. I read and understand what you type and respectfully request you do the same. In reference to what we are discussing and that is bonafide mortal combat... it doesnt matter what you do to get the injury... it could be rock-fu it could be whatever on earth equates to you getting the injuries on them becuase thats the only guarantee... it has zero to do with this art or that art, this technique or that technique... its has to do with injury which is seperating brain from body to deny function and incapacitate completely... violence gets you injury... if you arent the one doing it you are the one its being done to...

simple

If what YOU do works for YOU, that is fine. What I do works for me. Put up a youtube clip showing your method, and how not taking any control of the weapon works, providing your partner is really trying to attack you, and perhaps I will reconsider my views. Until then, I stand by what I train. I just dont see how not controlling a weapon, and assuming that you're going to hit the magic spots, will work, all the while the BG is swinging a blade at you. I control the threats mental and physical function, I control everything that makes that tool a weapon. I he has a gun and I have a gun I should shoot his gun instead of center mass right... becuase the gun is the threat right? If I have a knife and he has a gun I should stab the gun instead of stabbing him right??? If I have a bat and he has a gun , I should hit his arm holding the gun instead of hitting him in his head right??? no... thats silly. Same is applicable if your body is the only weapon at your disposal...why is it ok to wrestle over the tool instead of ending him where he stands.
Having to change to threat or tool specific techniques is the same as above "shooting the gun".
instead of waiting to see which specific technique you are going to use then trying to counter or defend whatever hes doing , keep it simple and universal by doing the only thing that means anything in the situations and thats is VIOLENCE.


I still think that you're slightly misunderstanding here. There is NO reason why you can't still take the person out, while you're controlling the arm, hand, etc.

I understand completely. If an injury gives me that portion to control then take advantage. If it does not, I am still continuing injuries... on the same token, an injury gives me a bonafide spinal reflex that is predictable and allows me to set up the chain of injuries that will lead to their incapacitation.

If you read my posts you will find accordance with what I am saying and the control you refer to.

I am nost misunderstanding. My posts are not being read and understood before commented on.

And no, its not about what I do that only works... Its about basic principles applicable to all things related to unarmed and armed combatives.... its an enhancement not a substitute.... no one is telling you to adpot a single doctrine as truth... only stressing the principles behind what it takes to get the job done.

I am not a camera jockey with ability to upload video streams to the net in order to prove something. We have gone through this before and this can be misconceived as a challenge.

It gets hashed out here or not at all... since this is what we are here for.
Using internet tools to further complicate the already complicated is not a viable option.

Its a about keeping it universal and dealing the only hand that is applicable.... violence

 

[jks9199]

Gee... I guess it's all our fault. Many of us have this silly idea that the situation is radically different if there's time to draw and fire (ideally from a position of cover or at least concealment), whatever the attacker has, than if we are forced to deal with a weapon attack while unarmed or unable to deploy a firearm or other weapon.

 

[BLACK LION]

thats not whats being discussed here. If you can draw down and shoot them...why not do it. It wont be the gun you are trying to shoot but the body of the threat.... correct???

I carry a blade all the time... I can draw down and get to stabbing vitals in a heartbeat if someone pulls a gun on me... but again, thats not whats being discussed here...

in that case... if a man pulls a gun on me I am going to stab him to death... is that a better answer.

injury is the goal of violence... they want to injure you to get what they want by using violence to get there... or vice versa...
the goal of injury is to seperate mind from body...they cant think or move they are done... however you have to get there, just do it.
it gets no more clear cut than that...

 

[BLACK LION]

"Dude, we're not talking about Ninjas here or military men. I highly doubt the punk robbing me so he can get his next fix, is going to jump on my back. Lets focus on reality here, not fantasy land."

I dont know about you but I dont train for the least educated criminal... I train and combat as if they know just as much as me...if not more... them knowing less is a bonus that is not computed in the equation for me until after its all said and done. Always assume they know more and bring it to them 300%

 

[MJS]

"Well, if most things don't work, then that tells me that the 1 and only true art that will ever works is what you do. I'm sorry to say though, that there are many arts, as well as people, who are advocating the things that I am, but I suppose we're all wrong as well. Inaccurate statement and somewhat cheap. I read and understand what you type and respectfully request you do the same. In reference to what we are discussing and that is bonafide mortal combat... it doesnt matter what you do to get the injury... it could be rock-fu it could be whatever on earth equates to you getting the injuries on them becuase thats the only guarantee... it has zero to do with this art or that art, this technique or that technique... its has to do with injury which is seperating brain from body to deny function and incapacitate completely... violence gets you injury... if you arent the one doing it you are the one its being done to... "


I'm sorry, but I'm calling it like I see it. Here is the difference. I am stating what I prefer and what makes the most sense to me. Yet, I have also said that if someone feels their method is better, more power to them. You are coming across as if your methods are superior to anyone and everyone. As I have said before, and I'll say again, I find it interesting that the majority are going with the control aspect. Additionally, I can also refer to another forum, with 2 very similar threads to this, in which the majority of people also agree with the control. Yes, there are some comments....1 or 2, in which people do not focus on that, but again, the majority do. IMHO, that speaks volumes.


simple

"If what YOU do works for YOU, that is fine. What I do works for me. Put up a youtube clip showing your method, and how not taking any control of the weapon works, providing your partner is really trying to attack you, and perhaps I will reconsider my views. Until then, I stand by what I train. I just dont see how not controlling a weapon, and assuming that you're going to hit the magic spots, will work, all the while the BG is swinging a blade at you. I control the threats mental and physical function, I control everything that makes that tool a weapon. I he has a gun and I have a gun I should shoot his gun instead of center mass right... becuase the gun is the threat right? If I have a knife and he has a gun I should stab the gun instead of stabbing him right??? If I have a bat and he has a gun , I should hit his arm holding the gun instead of hitting him in his head right??? no... thats silly. Same is applicable if your body is the only weapon at your disposal...why is it ok to wrestle over the tool instead of ending him where he stands.
Having to change to threat or tool specific techniques is the same as above "shooting the gun".
instead of waiting to see which specific technique you are going to use then trying to counter or defend whatever hes doing , keep it simple and universal by doing the only thing that means anything in the situations and thats is VIOLENCE. "

As I said, put up a youtube clip. That would probably not only end all this, but help us to better understand your views. You said it yourself, that you're better at showing, vs. typing. Well, ok, then show us. You are banking on the assumption that by overwhelming the guy with shots, that the weapon will be taken out of the picture. I disagree. IMO, you do not have a backup plan, in the event that your supposed superior method fails.

The situation you describe above is moot, due to the fact that you are now changing the scenario, putting both the BG and the defender on equal terms, with both having weapons. Yes, of course you're going to use the weapon. However, in the empty hand scenario, you are not on equal terms, therefore, given the fact that your 'weapons' ie: empty hands, are not superior to his weapon, you need to control, taking his weapon out of the picture, then following thru as I've described in other posts.



"I still think that you're slightly misunderstanding here. There is NO reason why you can't still take the person out, while you're controlling the arm, hand, etc.
I understand completely. If an injury gives me that portion to control then take advantage. If it does not, I am still continuing injuries... on the same token, an injury gives me a bonafide spinal reflex that is predictable and allows me to set up the chain of injuries that will lead to their incapacitation. "

Again, you're assuming that your shots will take him out, and that he will not be capable of using the weapon. What if that fails? What if you dont get the desired results? What is your plan b?

If you read my posts you will find accordance with what I am saying and the control you refer to.

Your version of control and my version differ.

I am nost misunderstanding. My posts are not being read and understood before commented on.

No, your posts are being read, and many are saying the same thing as I am. DIfference is, is that you dont want to see anything else other than your supposed superior methods.

And no, its not about what I do that only works... Its about basic principles applicable to all things related to unarmed and armed combatives.... its an enhancement not a substitute.... no one is telling you to adpot a single doctrine as truth... only stressing the principles behind what it takes to get the job done.

Umm...if you say so.

I am not a camera jockey with ability to upload video streams to the net in order to prove something. We have gone through this before and this can be misconceived as a challenge.

How is posting a clip so that people can better understand, going to be a challenge? The explaination of a challenge is posted in the rules. Is there anyone that you train with that is capable of filming?

It gets hashed out here or not at all... since this is what we are here for.
Using internet tools to further complicate the already complicated is not a viable option.

Then I guess we'll be hashing until the cows come home. BTW, YOU are the one that commented on seeing something vs. reading something. My idea was simply a suggestion.

Sir, I wish you and whomever you teach the best.

 

[MJS]

thats not whats being discussed here. If you can draw down and shoot them...why not do it. It wont be the gun you are trying to shoot but the body of the threat.... correct???

I carry a blade all the time... I can draw down and get to stabbing vitals in a heartbeat if someone pulls a gun on me... but again, thats not whats being discussed here...

in that case... if a man pulls a gun on me I am going to stab him to death... is that a better answer.

injury is the goal of violence... they want to injure you to get what they want by using violence to get there... or vice versa...
the goal of injury is to seperate mind from body...they cant think or move they are done... however you have to get there, just do it.
it gets no more clear cut than that...

Umm...are you reading what you're saying here? YOU are the one that brought up weapon vs. weapon, not I or anyone else. If you want to start a topic on that, then do so, otherwise, we're discussing the badguy having the weapon, and the defender being empty handed.

 

[MJS]

"Dude, we're not talking about Ninjas here or military men. I highly doubt the punk robbing me so he can get his next fix, is going to jump on my back. Lets focus on reality here, not fantasy land."

I dont know about you but I dont train for the least educated criminal... I train and combat as if they know just as much as me...if not more... them knowing less is a bonus that is not computed in the equation for me until after its all said and done. Always assume they know more and bring it to them 300%

Neither do I, however, you're starting to sound like the Gracie nutriders, who think that everyone is a Royce Gracie clone, capable of the same feats that he is. While I do not discredit the street punk, I think you're making them out to be a bit more than they all are.

BTW, I'm still waiting for your answers to the questions I asked you, from the post in which you quoted the above portion from.

 

[MJS]

http://www.kajukenbocafe.com/smf/index.php?topic=907.0

http://www.kajukenbocafe.com/smf/index.php?topic=513.0

Hmm...well will ya look at that....2 similar threads, yet the majority are claiming control of the weapon. But I suppose all those folks are wrong, I suppose weapon oriented systems are all wrong, such as those taught by the late Remy Preses, Leo Gaje, and other FMA masters. I suppose people who have used these methods in RL are also wrong, because they controlled, vs. attempting to overwhelm the BG with strikes.

 

[BLACK LION]

Did you call me a gracie nutrider??? You my friend sound like a bully....and have used some very cheap tactics in displaying that fact.
You are on a quest to disprove something while saying we agree... I agree, to each his own... do what works for you... I have never said otherwise. I have yet to say I have themagic pill and the only true way...
I have my convictions and I will stand by them regardless of the picture you paint.... it has nothing to do with whos stick is bigger and better... or whos way is right or wrong... you have yet to step into my boots and I have yet to step into yours... I asked you to prove zero to me becuase I could care less... I have nothing to prove to you becuase I again could care less... if you think, feel or wish to treat me like I am FOS then set my posts to ignore... I am not here to cross swords in a pissing contests over your logic vs mine... there is way too much time spent on doubt -objection and contempt rather than getting to the meat of the matter and accomplishing something so everyone understands.

But it seems like you feel high and mighty up there with 20k posts and all the adornments about your profile... so I should be suckling every morsel you spill onto the forum... sorry bro... not me... I may come off a certain way but never has it been my wat or the highway... I am not hiding who I am behind subtle verbage... you however are not fooling me.



conversation over... next topic please.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I am not a mod, so I will not get into any of the rest of the discussion between the two of you. You each seem to have very defined ideas of control.

But must there be namecalling?

I would like to point out that Lion's posts have never indicated him being a nutrider of the Gracies and I have never found MJS to be a bully.

Also, outside of that other site, I have never seen the term nutrider. Until now, that is. One of the reasons that I do not participate there all that much is because I really do not like the name calling. The lack of such behavior is one of the things I happen to like about MT.

In any case, I think that as one of you stated, your definitions of control may differ.

Daniel

 

[MJS]

Did you call me a gracie nutrider???

Re-read what I said. I said you're starting to sound like one. I didn't say you were one.

You my friend sound like a bully....and have used some very cheap tactics in displaying that fact.

I'm a member and an Asst. Admin of this forum. I, like everyone else, am not above and beyond the forum rules. If you have an issue with one of my posts, please feel free to report it, using the red triangle in the upper right hand corner of each post.

Cheap tactics...lol..sure, yeah, ok. Not quite sure what you're talking about, but feel free to point them out.

You are on a quest to disprove something while saying we agree... I agree, to each his own... do what works for you... I have never said otherwise. I have yet to say I have themagic pill and the only true way...
I have my convictions and I will stand by them regardless of the picture you paint.... it has nothing to do with whos stick is bigger and better... or whos way is right or wrong... you have yet to step into my boots and I have yet to step into yours... I asked you to prove zero to me becuase I could care less... I have nothing to prove to you becuase I again could care less... if you think, feel or wish to treat me like I am FOS then set my posts to ignore... I am not here to cross swords in a pissing contests over your logic vs mine... there is way too much time spent on doubt -objection and contempt rather than getting to the meat of the matter and accomplishing something so everyone understands.

I'm simply asking what makes your methods so superior to everyone else, due to the fact that is the way your posts come across. I'm curious as to what art(s) you study that advocate what you preach, or is this some creation of your own? As I've said in many posts, you're free to do as you wish. But, as I've pointed out, your posts are coming across just the way I describe.

But it seems like you feel high and mighty up there with 20k posts and all the adornments about your profile... so I should be suckling every morsel you spill onto the forum... sorry bro... not me... I may come off a certain way but never has it been my wat or the highway... I am not hiding who I am behind subtle verbage... you however are not fooling me.

LMAO!! High and mighty. My friend, I've been a member of this forum for many years. My posts have nothing to do with it. I'm not here to prove anything to anyone. My training is legit, verifiable, and I have nothing to hide. Many have complemented me on my posts, so that must say something. Who said that I was hiding? Hiding where? However, you come off as a know it all, with some superior skill above and beyond everyone else. The arts in my profile...Kenpo and Arnis are ones that I actively train in. I'm ranked in both. BJJ...its been a while since I've been on the mat, however, I roll when I can. Not ranked in that art. Krav Maga...no rank, no active training. A few private lessons, but I do not claim to teach that nor do I claim to be an expert in it.

Seeing that we're talking about ranks and stuff....share some about yourself. What rank and branch of the military were you in? Whats arts do you train in? What ranks are you?

If you're going to talk a big game sir, back up what you say. This forum is open to anyone, but if you're not happy here, you're free to go if you choose. As I said, I'm staff and a member here. I am not above anything, so if you have an issue, feel free to report my posts or speak to Bob Hubbard.

Good day.

conversation over... next topic please.

I did not invite you to this thread, you came yourself. If you want to debate, thats fine. If you want to run to the corner and cry foul, feel free.

 

[MJS]

To clarify the Gracie comment...I was referring to the Gracie fans who think that the Gracie way is "THE" only way. BL has made it clear that his way is superior to everyone else. I'm simply asking questions. Seems like he's reading more into it, for some odd reason. As I've said many times in my posts, I do not claim that my way is the best. I've said that anyone is free to do what they want. However, it makes you wonder, when direct quesitons are asked, and suddenly people clam up...why? Something to hide? People ask questions. I did that, and there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[MJS]

I am not a mod, so I will not get into any of the rest of the discussion between the two of you. You each seem to have very defined ideas of control.

But must there be namecalling?

I would like to point out that Lion's posts have never indicated him being a nutrider of the Gracies and I have never found MJS to be a bully.

Also, outside of that other site, I have never seen the term nutrider. Until now, that is. One of the reasons that I do not participate there all that much is because I really do not like the name calling. The lack of such behavior is one of the things I happen to like about MT.

In any case, I think that as one of you stated, your definitions of control may differ.

Daniel

IMHO Dan, I think that you're right, and I've said it before...there are differing opinions of control. BL seems to think that when I speak of control, that I'm doing nothing else BUT controlling. That is not the case. The control is for nothing more than a few seconds. I either block/strike/redirect the weapon while counter striking and then getting away or I do the above but work for a disarm, break, etc. Again, the control factor is pretty short.

 

[morph4me]

If you don't control the weapon just begging to have it used on you. Control the weapon in order to get to and control the attacker and you increase your chances of surviving the encounter.

 

[BLACK LION]

I have remained respectful despite the badgering being done becuase of my postition... It seems to rear its ugly head in every thread.
I have thanked you several times in several posts for a reason MJS... There is no reason for you to approach me in the manner you are.
This is not about deuling over verbage or terminology. Its about intel and info.
I understand where you are coming from. However, I choose to bypass all of the things outside and work from the meat...rather than going outside in by working through the tool and getting to the real task at hand...I would rather work from the inside out and get to the real threat which is a thinking moving person.... the brain and body behind the function... not the tool front.
Clearly, this is my approach and I am not the only one but its my cross to bear... likewise, there are others with a different approach and that is thiers cross to bear... to me its just a man effected by serial injuries that happened to be weilding a tool.... I would rather focus on crushing his throat, breaking his knee and cracking his spine than what technique I can use to get that tool...
I have accepted being cut or stabbed from the get go and infact I may not even know it when it happens...it may have already happened... regardless... my focus shouldnt change or shift to the tool or even bypassing the tool... the focus is serial injury to a non-functional state.


focus on injury to control the function of the brain and body... not focus on controling the tool itself... injury is the deciding factor on either side... if you are not doing it... it will be done to you...

I have never represented my opinion as superior... but when it comes to the game of life and death I will not accept anything less than my success in dropping them where they stand... not with some magic voodoo prowess or some super spec ops secret fighting technique...but with the tool of violence... which declares no technique or style.

I am most concerned with what I can do buck-naked rather than what I can do with snap on tools... likewise I am more concerned with what they can do as a moving thinking human than what they can do with snap on tools...


you like apples...I like oranges...

lets agree we disagree and move on... but dont goad and taunt people becuase they disagree... we are here to learn not spread infection...

Once again... I post here for a reason and its not becuase of anything other than the professionalism of most of its member base... If I want childish mouth frothing rants I can log-in to warriortalk and throw rocks at the angry mob with pitch forks and torches... I dont come on here to contribute and do my part in that regard and no more, no less. I expect to receive the same courtesy as I give no more, no less. typing posts defaming people or downsizing them to mall-ninja wannabees that extracted all thier knowledge from magazines is not a judgement anyone here is in a position to make. Regardless of what your perception of ones experience is...or wether or not you feel thier background or lack of is substantial enought to destroy meat in the face of danger... It doesnt matter... wether a seasoned killer on the battlefield or life long practicioner who has never been positioned to take a life...it doesnt matter... respect everyone equally... regardless... there is no excuse to behave otherwise short of plain ignorance...

Of course this statement is entirely generalized and applicable to all who apply...if any apply.

I respect everyone and carry myself in that fashion... no need to condesend or disrespect me because I wont just sit and take it....
I get to the point without the sugary toppings... if I agreed with everyone and everything... well then, that would be very substantial in terms of my individuality...

In the end.. you do what you train...



and again...



to each his own...


I wish everyone the best in their endeavors