PDA

View Full Version : There is no Martial Arts that Guarranty it is Very Effective in Self Defense.


stdalire
February 9, 2000, 05:35 AM
I have titled my topic "There is no Martial Arts Style that Guarranty - it is a Very Effective in Self Defense".

I had posted this in relation of the topic of "Caeca Invidia Es" seeking advise of what kind of martial arts does a person should study.

Based on my readings of many contributors of writings in the world of Martial Arts in the Web with many MA schools they have studied from, many claims to have the best kind of martial arts that is better than this and that kind of MA's. I've been in many actual brawl like others but most techniques in any MA we have studied were not used.

I am also a fanatic practioner of martial arts coupled with some magical words or Oracion as we called in Latin. Up to now, I had memorized a lot of so called magic words which were handed to me. But the main player of self defense is common sense and of course any kind of training intended for self defense is good and it is up to the person applying it.

At age 13, I took up a formal schooling of Karate in Laoag City, Philippines where I took up my high school. In those years 1972-74, Bruce Lee Film are the most patronaged films in town. It almost has influenced of all Karate/Kungfu enthusiast or any kind of martial Arts. I found out that they have all in commons, that is punching, kicking, grabbing and grappling. Or most fight ends to grabbing one onother if each opponent cannot be knockdown by the 1st, 2nd or 3rd strike of any fighter.

When I went to Manila to take my Bachelors Degree, I studied Arnis (Stick Fighting, Judo, Kendo) under Presas Brothers, the brother of Remy Presas who is now famous under MA's circle in USA.

Now, if it comes to real encounter, it is not the kind or name of Martial Arts you have studied that determine that you are on the favor side of a fight. But it is your personality if you are really determined to fight and not afraid of any consequences during the fight and after the fight and of course good training and good body. Studying any kind of MA is okay and master the defensive and attacking techniques of that particular MA, for in real combat it will no take long to finish the fight.

In conclusion - I am ready to answer all the pros and cons that it may be commented on this thread for an exchange of knowledge in the Martial Arts world.

Thank you,



[This message has been edited by stdalire (edited February 09, 2000).]

SB
February 9, 2000, 08:08 AM
For years now, Forrest Morgan, author of "Living the Martial Way" has warned that, "There is no good or bad martial arts, only good or bad martial artists."

Not to get too critical with analysis, I nontheless have to believe that the practioner is more important than the style itself.

[This message has been edited by SB (edited February 10, 2000).]

Skorzeny
February 9, 2000, 09:15 AM
I certainly agree with the idea that there is NO such thing as "the ultimate" martial art.
The reason is that, like any other human endeavor, a particular martial art is an accumulation of responses to a series of historical, cultural and social circumstances.

Therefore, a given martial art is (was) suitable for a particular set of situations. For the same reason, some arts or systems designed in response to a particular set of situations may not be appropriate in context of DIFFERENT social and cultural settings.

This is why, I believe, many "traditional" martial arts do not make very effective self-defense systems in 21st Century United States. We do not live in 17th Century Guangdong, 18th Century Okinawa or 19th Century Tokyo. We do not have to fear the two swords-armed samurais and we do not have to fear an attack while sitting on a tatami.

Looking at it from another view, one cannot escape the conclusion then, that some arts are MORE appropriate for the social and cultural setting of where and when we live (21st Century America). Some arts such as BJJ and Muay Thai are, IMHO, much more effective in a real mano-a-mano fight than Shotokan or Tae Kwon Do. Mind you, neither is a "complete" or "ultimate" art useful for all situations.

There is also a misconception about how a martial art is to be used. Too many folks have the mistaken Hollywood notion of "get insulted, break out into the fists of fury, kick ass and preserve honor" hype.

Folks, any self-defense system of UNARMED nature is really the self-defense method of the last resort. If you can stand on your feet and have an avenue of escape, by all means, run away, flee, escape or call for help. Let the police do the "ass-kicking."
This is why I personally feel that grappling arts IN GENERAL make better "last-ditch" self-defense systems than striking arts, because when you are ambushed, tackled or forced onto the ground is the time when you will most need an UNARMED self-defense system.

Some criticize grappling arts as being unsuitable for self-defense because 1) they are unable to deal with multiple attackers and 2) they cannot cope very well against armed opponents. To those criticisms, I respond thusly: if some of the more "traditional" striking arts are not effective in a mano-a-mano fight, how effective would they be in multiple opponent scenarios? Clearly, to involve onself in a situation where many are against one is ultimately very foolish. Grappling will not get you out of such a situation, but neither will Tae Kwon Do, Wing Chun, boxing or any number of other systems.

As for dealing with an armed opponent, it is true that some arts may be marginally (emphasis on marginally) more effective than others, but unless one puts years and even decades into the training, it is again ultimately futile to engage an armed opponent while one is unarmed himself (hence the familiar saying, "it is a fool who shows up for a gunfight with a knife"). Unless one is willing to put years and decades into such a training, IMO, the time is better utilized by training in some effective unarmed vs. unarmed techniques.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

Art Eatman
February 9, 2000, 09:54 AM
All my life, I've just never liked fighting. That doesn't mean I never fought; I just didn't like it. My idea of close combat is an '06 at 500 yards. In my Social Insecurity years, I like the idea of fighting even less.

That said, it seems from all the comments I've read through several decades--as well as this forum--and comments from a teacher of an unarmed self-defense course I once took, that mindset has a lot to do with one's success.

That is, the stereotypical street fighter follows Vince Lombardi's advice: "Act like you've done it before". He's been there and knows the pain and (relatively) doesn't care. If you take a series of hard "for real" punches or strikes, and are emotionally startled, you're gonna lose, most likely. He's not going to stop until he's down or you're down.

If your inherent mindset is "hair, teeth and eyeballs", and you have skill, you may well win.

Is the above any sort of reasonable analysis? I'm not thinking of some Frat Rat who had a few beers too many and is feeling belligerent. I'm thinking of some guy who's grown up with violence as part of his life. It seems to me that avoidance or "beat feet" is general wisdom...

Regards, Art

pluspinc
February 9, 2000, 10:42 AM
Over the years I ran into a lot of types that "knew" martial arts that violated the law. They all shared one thing in common. The went to jail.
We had a state Martial Arts Champion here killed by two drunken teenagers. He was not drunk. Many were puzzled by why he did not put up a defense. The two suspects when arrested were surprised at his background and as they said, "how easy" he was.
I've also worked with officers with strong backgrounds in various arts. In practice they seldom if ever used those skills and the matter turned into a wrestling match of sorts with no evidence of trained skills.
With much investigation on the subject, we have concluded a failure to perform ratio that is very high.
Handling a mouthy drunk is one thing, but with strong criminal INTENT of a criminal,and THEIR rules of engagement we have determined a failure to perform is based on mental chemistry that blocks memory and the ability to recall training which occurs in shootings as well. There is no amount of training that can change a genetic reponse to fright.
The rules of criminal engagement are not like in the movies and are not formal, organized or fair.

WETSU
February 9, 2000, 11:04 AM
Gotta agree with Art of some of his points.
IMHO, martial arts forms a good foundation for more learning. It shouldn't matter what you study.

From there you need to learn how to fight. And that involves mindset and aggresivness. It also requires knowledge. It is very helpful to understand human anatomy, and human nature. Learn to read the signs in your opponent, study the effects of alcohol and drugs, figure out if the guy's been in prison etc.(tats) Is he a grappler, a western style boxer, or a MA type. If he's hardcore he will be a streetfighter, which is what you need to do.

Ultimately, you want to hit his weak parts with your strong hard parts, and damage his body as quickly as possible. Absolutely explode into him and unleash a barrage of damaging blows that in combination will cause him great pain, disable him or simply knock him out.

It's amazing what kind of horrible damage bare hands and boots can do to the human body with a couple simple, unexpected blows. Fight won.

Gopher a 45
February 9, 2000, 01:12 PM
I regards to pluspinc's comments, I would like to know if he knows the background of the MA who was killed (while preserving anonymity of course) because a lot of champions are very good...at competition, with rules and limited physical contact. It was one thing my instructor harped on is that you fight as you train (assuming you retain any training at all when the fight actually occurs). Therefore, those who have fought in tournaments "by the rules" may actually be at a disadvantage as compared to somone with no training who is simply trying to hurt someone no matter how they do it.

I have to agree with Skorzeny that BJJ is a good system to learn for practical self-defense, but like all things, it has its limitations. If you have ever watched any of the so-called "reality" fighting shows, you will see that, more often than not, the one who has good ground skills wins the match, especially since it is only one-on-one fighting. Once on the ground, devastating kicks and punches are of little or no use and it is very hard to deal a crippling blow that way as someone charges in, especially with limited room (though I have seen it done).

On multiple opponents, of course everything changes. Stay off the ground for as long as possible, lest your head be used for place kicking by one goblin while you are grappling with the second. By all means leave if possible. If it isn't, then do as much damage to one opponent as you can as quickly as you can so that at least you even the odds. There are no rules in a street fight.

I liked stick fighting, but it isn't practical to carry escrima sticks wherever one goes, although some makeshift ones can sometimes be found (mop handles, etc.)

Another thing to take into consideration is that you don't want to fight on an opponents terms, only yours (granted, you don't always have that luxury). For example, if he favors kicks, close the range rapidly and render the kicks less effective; don't stay at perfect kicking range while you try to plan a way in as you will only give them more opportunity to score on you. If he wants to go to the ground badly, there may be a reason. Also, you can defuse a lot of fights by simply expressing your willingness (though not necessarily eagerness) to see the fight through, as most thugs operate by intimidation and often will back down when they realize they might have to pay a price for their behavior. Give that person an out though! A lot of fights happen over ego, and if you can let the antagonist avoid a fight while saving face, by all means do so.

Finally, once you have determined that a fight will take place no matter what you do to deescalate it, you must act without hesitation and get the fight over with as quickly as possible. Letting things devolve into a shouting/pushing match will only serve to lengthen the time you are vulnerable. Of course the same applies to armed combat (back me up here someone!) in that once you've made the shoot/no shoot determination, you better be prepared to see it through. Hesitation will kill you, but most people just don't see it as so applicable to unarmed combat (but it is!), since the act of sending a bullet on its way is totally unretractable.

Armed vs. unarmed? That's a whole 'nother post and I've prattled on forever anyway. This is a good thread!

John

[This message has been edited by Gopher a 45 (edited February 09, 2000).]

Skorzeny
February 9, 2000, 02:00 PM
Gopher/John:

Like you I really like Escrima (or Arnis, Kali, whatever it is called). Sure the stick work is not practical, but it does translate nicely into knife fighting. Of course, when you introduce a weapon into the equation, it's a whole new ball game.

My system is this (in order of priority or occurrence):

1. Run away if possible.
2. Rifle/Shotgun.
3. Handgun.
4. Knife (usually a small pocket knife).
5. Kicking and punching (Muay Thai).
6. Elbows and Knees (Muay Thai).
7. Chokes, armbars, leglocks (BJJ and Shooto) in combination with strikes on the ground if possible.
8. God.

By the way, also like you, I recognize the limitations of grappling arts. But let me ask you this: do you really think that other arts and systems are any more useful than BJJ (with its throws and takedowns) in dealing with multiple opponents?

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

WETSU
February 9, 2000, 02:05 PM
Gopher your.45, You make a good point, about not playing by your opponent's rules. Punch a wrestler's lights out, kick a boxer into submission or wrestle a kicker to the ground-kinda like "rock scissors paper" huh. Each one has it's strengths and weaknesses. Back when I was in HS, we had a lot of ethnic backgrounds attending. Black, white, hispanic and lot's of Cambodian, Viet and Laotian refugees. Well, fights would breakout, and they were interesting. Golden glove hispanic boxer friend of mine got his ass beat by a 'bode using MA. Same 'bode got his ass whupped later by a football player who went to ground with him quickly. This was all kid-stuff but shows an example.

Lastly, what you said about committing yourself to follow through. Very important.Also, don't underestimate you ability to psych the other guy out-esp. if dealing with a drunk with "beer muscles" I watched a friend (small guy, 5'8", 135 lbs)absolutly freak out a big drunk guy who pulled a 6" sheathknife out during an altercation. My friend pulled out a cheap straight razor. The guy chilled real fast. My buddy was terrified, but pulled it off real cool. That would be a grand bluff my friends!

Gopher a 45
February 9, 2000, 03:38 PM
Skorzeny (Otto??),

8. God. How true!

Kali does translate very well into knife fighting, which is in fact where it originated, from what I understand. The Filipinos are some of the most accomplished knife fighters anywhere. Besides, stick work teaches you a lot about movement and leverage that work for you in other areas of MA as well.

I don't think any other arts are more or less useful than BJJ in terms of multiple opponents. However, BJJ comes into its own only on the ground, which is a disadvatage when faced with more than one person. Unless, you can throw a person without yourself going to the ground, in which case you've bought yourself some time to deal with goblin B. When combined with some stand-up skills BJJ is much more effective. However, given the choice between learning BJJ and a stand-up art, I would choose BJJ every time. Statistically, most fights end up on the ground anyway. (I'm talking about street-type fights which last more than a few seconds) So why not play the odds? Besides, I found it easier to learn grappling first then work on striking, though some may disagree. Ideally, you should be comfortable at all ranges of combat (I'm not) so as to be able to not "have to" depend on a fight occurring at your favorite range. That being said, I favor BJJ and related styles more because, paradoxically, proximity is security to you the grappler (in the absence of an edged weapon of course) because you can control his arms and legs, "weapons" if you will, by virtue of being in contact with them, whereas at punching kicking range, you don't have control of them (I never saw much catching the person's fist or their kick in midair unless the receiver was accomplished at trapping). In practice, I found that the range went from kicking to boxing-trapping (ranges 5 and 6) to grappling VERY quickly, unless both people were willing to keep the match at that range, so I found that ground skills were the best bet overall, though one shouldn't neglect standup. Strikes on the ground are always good. They don't even have to be hard. What I found is that a top position against someone who doesn't know better is good because any strike will get them to turn away, setting up an easy choke. The guard is an excellent defensive position (from which you can attack somewhat), but I wouldn't use it in a fight unless I had no other choice.

WETSU,

Psychology is the essence of all conflict (look at Skorzeny's sig!). All you have to do is make the aggressor see absolutely clearly that the cost of their actions may very well exceed the potential benefits, which is illustrated by your friend's story with the razor. Why do ya think Hitler never invaded Switzerland? :D

John

P.S. and someone who could grapple would have broken the football player eventually. It just points to the fact that you can't always expect the fight to occur at the range you like. Not much room to kick on the ground, so be ready!

Skorzeny
February 9, 2000, 05:26 PM
Gopher/John:

Man, I agree with you fully. If I had to choose one art/system, it would be either BJJ or Shooto.

I also agree that kicking/punching/trapping ranges tend to be crossed quickly in a real fight. People tend to crash through those rather quickly.

You know what was really funny? I saw an altercation on TV between a anti-Castro guy and a Cuban baseball ref/umpire on a baseball field somewhere. The Cuban charged the impromptu demonstrator. Both took a couple of swings at each other, but the Cuban tackled the demonstrator in a short order. The anti-Castro guy headlocked him (looked like the guillotine choke!) and then the Cuban took him down, before others broke them up. For a moment there, it looked like a NHB match!

It was funny for me to see some guys (who, no doubt, have absolutely no NHB training) instinctively use techniques that resembled BJJ techniques.

BTW: Where do you train in BJJ?

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

Erik
February 9, 2000, 07:59 PM
Some things I believe:

1. All martial arts are effective.

2. None are "ideal" all of the time.

3. You must be able to adapt- quikly!

4. Its the man, not the martial art.

5. Its not the size of the man in the fight, its the size of the fight in the man.

6. You will fight the way that you train.

7. You should be well conditioned.

8. Your favorite move will not work most of the time.

9. The basics work most of the time.

10. Kata is great.

11. Kata is not enough.

12. Too many people believe they will fight like a twenty year master.

13. Too many people learn the hard way that they will not.

There are more, but I'll spare you... :-)

Erik

stdalire
February 10, 2000, 05:00 AM
Greetings to All:

What a nice input from MA's of different style. As I have said, and what the rest said, all martial arts are good and it depends on the person how he was trained and how he execute the needed techniques to subdue his opponent.

No one should discount the effectiveness of striking, nor grabbing or grappling as all these techniques has particular usage. They have strong points and weaknesses also.

Another thing, is the person is really a man who is determined to fight to the finish either to stop, cripple or kill the other. So it all depends.

As others said, it would be impractical to fight a person having a knife with the barehand, if there are choices to use as an aid for self defense.

For instance, if someone has a knife and I have a stick, I will use my stick as an extension of my hand, and for me it is easier to defend myself nor cripple the attacker if I have a stick to use. But again, if you are a professional living in a city, you will not be carrying a stick with you always. May be a stick which is modified to be decently carried but strong enough when elongated (if folded type).

Again, there are scenarios where we are better of to disarm an attacker wielding a knife when we are barehand, rather than disarming a knife wielder whilst we have a knife also. In some situation we need to face a person having a knife to defend ourselves.

As to fight on the ground, for my own analysis, you cannot fight with multiple opponent say 2 up to 4 people, for if you just grab one guy then the rest will storm you with punches and kicks.

Tournaments and street fight is very much different, because you only expect to be striked and you strike too with rules. In street fight we all know that we face determined killers or fighters that is after our money, our life, or just their happiness to molest someone.

Henceforth, not all situation a particular martial arts style is effective or practical to use.

What I have seen in my studies of martial arts. All kinds of it does a role in a fight.
For instance, on the moment an opponent is about to srike one another, after 2, 3, punches or kicks being delivered perhaps and none was knockdown, they will surely grab each other. If I am being grab, I see the usefulness of Judo, like hip-throw, or shoulder-throw if I want to be released by the locked of my opponent. If still I can't get out of my opponent grip, I can use my elbow job and knee kick or using my fingers, phoenix knuckle strike to either of the head, or bonny parts of the body. If stil cannot get out, I will side step left or right and bend forward and hook his feet with my left or right feet and grab one of his feet with abrupt motion to raise up, that way we will both fell down at our back.

I've been studying how really martial arts can help me to be always on the favor side of an unexpected mano mano or fight. [As many have said, we don't want trouble but we only showing if martial arts really give us an edge to a real situation.] As I have analyze, it is all up to the person if he has good foundation of his basic of blocks and strikes and most of it, he is determined to hit and be hit during the fight.

I have seen many killers with knife, without any MA's but these guys are playing dirty tricks and the victim is unaware, but if only the victims knows first or aware of the attacker intention then perhaps these acclaimed killers without any knowledge in MA's might not have been successful with their evil intent. That is why I am the guy who never believe that ther eis a person that is tought. The body is soft and penetrable and any one can be able to strike it if he is determined. In ordinary brawl without knife or weapon, for sure the MA's will prevail. But if both has learning in MA's for sure there is a draw or one will be crippled whoever got the chance to land his strikes effectively to his opponent. That is why I said, there is no such thing as a superior martial arts, they are all good when the person using it has good training to it, and has a blood running in his vein that he has no hesitant to face any opponent no matter what and who he is. By the way, sizes, big muscles, or well built person plays a big role in a fight but not a guarranty again that he will win a fight.

I am just 5'4", so what do you expect me to do with a big opponent, I will strike him to the knees or a lower portion of his body and if I am being grabbed I use Judo and Hapkido.

Thank you again with your comments, I have read them word for word.

pluspinc
February 10, 2000, 05:11 AM
The "champion" killed here was very well "trained" but based on what was said about him in some newspaper reports he was not what you would call "street smart" coming from a rather upscale background and he was in bad ass territory.
>>>>>>>
As for the comments we "resort to our training" that sounds good, but doesn't show up in the real world when it is life and death for a wide variety of reasons such as the reason a champion swimmer can drown, and top pilots crash from their own failure to perform.
Failure to perform when faced with reality is such a problem we find 88% of cops killed never touch their guns when they have the chance to. That is why we tackled the "you resort to your training." It works only when you are able to process that information and crooks just don't let us do that and the result of a sudden attack blows us into a state of fright where we are so limited on thought process and taken over by genetics we often fail to think "fast" enough or process enough information.
I was surprised when I started to get a lot of martial arts types in our handgun class. They were coming to get information on fright and genetics we have uncovered that explain much of our inability to defend ourselves when faced with reality.
The level of failed performance can vary between each of us and vary based on many factors, but the consistant thread is that many WELL trained people fail to resond to even low fear hazards. More work needs to be done on this. That is why we are so strong on AVOIDANCE to stop the process of moving into fright where we can grid lock from genetics to memory blocking chemicals. It isn't what we want to hear, but it sure is on the money we are finding.

stdalire
February 10, 2000, 05:40 AM
A short note to remember: We learned martial arts to have a better position when there are unexpected encounter from an agressor. So, I consider it as a body conditioning only to react on dangers perceived by our senses.

We buy, licensed or unlicensed guns for the purpose that we have a last resort to use when all avenues to understand, retreat and being patient has been all exhausted.

I have not think other purposes of a martial arts or owning a gun if not for self defense, secondly perhaps for competition, collections and hunting. If for the latter three purpose we don't need a CCW. Thus, a person who study MA's and carries a gun has always in mind of depending on these two weapon for survival between life and death caused by a human being.

The same to me, the more martial arts I am interested into to study in my early 20's and 30's, the more I see the impracticality of many techniques being taught as effective defense in a brawl. Experienced counts a lot also in shaping you if how you react in a real scenario, but I don't mean also we have to go into fight, but in our existence of different yrs in our life it helps. Even that supposedly actual encounter has consumated or not but how does a person reacted in those moments that he is in that plane of situation.

New learner of martial arts thinks that when they are already black belt or higher rank they have already the capability to subdue an opponent, but for me, it is still the beginning to learn more and the hundreds of techniques being studied perhaps only 2 or 3 is being applied in a real situation. So, if you are being hold by any BG or goblin as others describe, react fast by just hitting or striking any parts of his body and whatever you have learned in your MA's will just come out simultaneously as you are trained already for that and it became a habit. It is an automatic reflexes, there is no more, Okinawan, Shotokan, BJJ, TKD, Judo or any style that you think of to use.

fubsy
February 10, 2000, 08:09 AM
I would like to put forth that the one thing everyone ought to consider here is the mindset....I mean an absolute commitment, you had better make that opponent realize that your ready to rock and want to go...make him realize that to tumble with you is for real. And if he's already marked you as his target, it wont matter, bluffing aint gonna work. I cant remember were it came from but do you guys recall were instructors tell ya that if you have the time mark a point on the opponent and shoot for that spot.....You should try if time allows to spot areas you will attack---thats one of the areas that training comes in, it should help you evaluate distance etc...its done almost in milliseconds...You have to aware of tachphyscia(sp), Ive had occasion to realize that an altercation might be necessary so I had the time to either leave or prepare if leaving was not an optionn, Ive had to stop myself from beoming so focused that I excluded the individuals friends and my surroundings, so be aware of that.
I think that for the most part we grow a nation of wimps, the crimminal or violent person has a very different outlook on violence and when joe lawabiding is first confronted with it, it can be very hard to make that initial adjustment quickly and its necessary. It can get your butt beaten, you have to no matter what be mean, viscious, use every trick, device, weapon, you can muster. And realize with all of that there are no gurantee's, you can still lose.
As far as not fighting the way you trained.....thats area so ripe for different variables.
first, if you train for sport, you fight like its a sport.
If your not automatically reacting with some training youve learned---you havent trained enuf.....thats one of the reason's that Karate takes so long to learn properly. You might be taught multiple kata's were these moves are located. But how many have taken one and just broke it down and worked just one for a significant period of time? I dont mean 8 hours I mean months. I believe the tiime I heard was that it takes 5k repetitions to know something.....
How many of you have continued to train with broken bones, cracked ribs, on days you were exhausted, no sleep.......that bum isnt gonna attack you when its your advantage, so your already behind the 8-ball. To be a fighter takes commitment, not just I go to class three times a week stuff, hours at home, time in the gym, time on the track....prepare yourself physcially. Most people of the type were talking about that I know of, work out in the gym, they are strong and they dont care if they hurt you, they want to controll you and pain is a way to do it. All those moves are great, if your in condition to use them and strong enuf to apply them. How many of you dress to fight? How many have ever worked out in street clothes? Why not, that guy isnt coming into your dojo necessarily...all those high kicks are useless in jeans....or restrictive clothing or those cute spins in shoes that grip the ground......
Imo its just like shooting, we dont train enuf, hard enuf, long enuf and properly so its easy to say that they didnt resort to training......
conditioning is something we shouldnt overlook, fatigue makes cowards...if you let it....we are not mentally tuff enuf.
..jmo's....look we have "masters", "experts" who because they have been doing something for decades they react the way they know how, they have trained for years......
You want something quick and effective down and dirty,,,ok, here it is...learn boxing, get out there and learn to box....and you'll still lose from time to time but its a short learning curve---although it too can take considerable time to master, but your only concern is throwing the hands and moving, no trapping, pressure points, jointlocks, wrestling,,,etc....kicks...etc...
It just amazes me that people train 3-5 hours a week and think they are really bad, news flash....most boxers I know train everyday, 3-4 hours a day,well on sundays the guys I know generally just do roadwork....lol......jmo....fubsy.

WETSU
February 10, 2000, 09:13 AM
Gopher/John
I gotta think that not attacking Switzerland was one of the only smart things that crazy nazi Hitler did during WWII. I guess the idea of facing a bunch of well-trained, individual riflemen hanging from every cliff did'nt sound too good.

Skorzeny
February 10, 2000, 10:43 AM
Wetsu:

I am digressing here, but what possible motive did Hitler have to invade Switzerland?

Hitler wasn't just "mad." He was at times a coldly calculating realist. What was there to be gained by occupying Switzerland? Very little if at all. In fact, there was a great deal to lose even if such an invasion were successful since the Swiss were a nice conduit of smuggled goods and semi-legitimate financial services.

While the Swiss have a well deserved reputation for courage in defending their homes. I really think that fact had very little to do with why Nazi Germany did not invade Switzerland.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

Skorzeny
February 10, 2000, 10:53 AM
Fubsy:

Boxing is all fine and dandy, but would you make that same recommendation for a 110lbs. woman?

Boxing requires strength, speed, endurance and technique. I doubt very much that a small, "weak" woman who trains in boxing a couple of times a week will be able to defend herself against anyone but the weak.

I personally train in Muay Thai, BJJ and Shooto with professionals (both Muay Thai and NHB), but then again I also lift weights during day time, do Ashtanga Yoga and am a glut for sado-masochistic punishment at the gym. I am also 6'1" and weigh 175lbs of very little fat. I doubt very much that the bulk of the population would be interested in the kind of training you and I are willing to undergo.

So, for those who are not "110%" dedciated, what is really needed is a "last ditch" self-defense system that relies on something other than strength, speed and stamina. What is needed is a system based on leverage and technique.

I think that Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu or Shooto fits that perfectly. Vale Tudo classes are conducted in street clothes (well, shorts and T-shirt) and are meant for self-defense and NHB.

Boxing is a great system that complements many other arts/systems, but it is one-dimensional. I have seen enough well-trained boxers who got taken down and beaten senselessly by those even minimally trained in grappling to know that it is pretty ineffective BY ITSELF in a real fight.

Next time you see boxing, count the number of times boxers clinch. Every one of those times, a grappler can take the boxer down and beat him senseless or break bones and joints.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

fubsy
February 10, 2000, 12:24 PM
skorzeny,

"Boxing is all fine and dandy, but would you make that same recommendation for a 110lbs. woman?"
....No i would not, and likewise I have seen very few women blk belts of 3rd and 4th degree vintage who could stop a determined attacker consistently either especially if the weight and size advantage is extremely disproporional---you cant remove that from the equation any more than you could the occasional success that one built that way might have...they dont have the strength necessarily any more than a 110lb male would although he would be stronger than them and
perhaps better able. for most people what I said I think still applies. I firmly believe that most people if that would just practice straight forward simple techniques such as boxing provides they would be better off.
""boxing requires strength, speed, endurance and technique. I doubt very much that a small, "weak" woman who trains in boxing a couple of times a week will be able to defend herself against anyone but the weak."
......I should disagree with this? I know no one who trains in many disciplines that having the same criteria would be successful either and that is my point. I believe in weapons of all types and that includes what ever you can come up with on the spur of the moment---im not talking point competitions or the ufc competitions....im talking about your average person trying to maintain a reasonable level of skill necessary to fight with some confidence if necessary. If their physcial handicaps are such that they are most likely to be incapable of handling a physcial attack, they should carry weapons. I worked out with a fellow who is just the weight and small in stature of what we're talking about......this guy has just received his blk belt in the last year...the whole time I would be out their sparring with this guy i never once got tagged hard--he's hell on wheels in point fighting. and he'd go if it was serious but the guy is handicapped by his build, very light in weight small in stature---not much muscle, I would have liked to have seen him train up to some strength instead of all the point fighting....

"I personally train in Muay Thai, BJJ and Shooto with professionals (both Muay Thai and NHB), but then again I also lift weights during day time, do Ashtanga Yoga and am a glut for sado-masochistic punishment at the gym. I am also 6'1" and weigh 175lbs of very little fat. I doubt very much that the bulk of the population would be interested in the kind of training you and I are willing to undergo.""
....No dont include me in that hard work...I had to give it up do to injuries and age..lol...in all seriousness strength can not and should not be overlooked.

""So, for those who are not "110%" dedciated, what is really needed is a "last ditch" self-defense system that relies on something other than strength, speed and stamina. What is needed is a system based on leverage and technique."
...I have a mild disagreement here, I dont believe that is correct. if a person dosent have strength the last thing they want to do is go to the ground with someone. Ive been there too many times and its too easy to smother their moves. Should they no some of it--sure, i would rather they keep them at a distance with footwork and split as soon as possible not clenching unless they have no choice.....using your example a 110 women against a 220 male or slightly smaller? avoid and get out of the area, or carrry a weapon and get out of the area.

""I think that Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu or Shooto fits that perfectly. Vale Tudo classes are conducted in street clothes (well, shorts and T-shirt) and are meant for self-defense and NHB."
...I know its become wildly popular since the ufc's contest's were going on and thats fine, Ive nothing against them, I just question the validity of a 110lb person grappling against a much larger person--they have to know it cause it might get forced on them, but not the first thing they do.

""Boxing is a great system that complements many other arts/systems, but it is one-dimensional. I have seen enough well-trained boxers who got taken down and beaten senselessly by those even minimally trained in grappling to know that it is pretty ineffective BY ITSELF in a real fight.""
....Ive no doubt its happened, I also no its happened the other way too...so what does that leave us...opinions....Ive no problem with the "complete warrior" concept of using ground work, feet hands, jointlocks armbarms takedowns, etc etc,fighting at various distances...including weaponless and weapons use.
The reality for me is this, most folks are not going to encounter joe bjj, or ken shoote fighter, they most likely will be well served with a style of fighting that they can learn reasonablly quick and retain some proficency in without the 3 or 4 hour six days a week training session. Besides when your in the ring and thats dude is pounding on you, its a lot like in the street, its not like some dojo's, your gonna get reasonably good training. but thats my opinion.

""Next time you see boxing, count the number of times boxers clinch. Every one of those times, a grappler can take the boxer down and beat him senseless or break bones and joints.""
......Now this is what i kinda am getting around too, ive never seen a boxer in the street..not the ring...need to resort to clenching. Not once. He is not fighting necessarily a highly skilled person.

Skorzeny, dont misunderstand me here I do appreciate your perspective, take muythai knees, elbows, feet, fist, forearms, whatever else you can hit with...good stuff..how many folks are really gonna train all that in to their workouts at such a rate as to become proficient enuf to use it? I think boxing simplifies it and initially builds enuf confidence to help out,
punching is about as basic as it gets.
.........fubsy.

WETSU
February 10, 2000, 12:32 PM
Skorzeny,
You are right, I don't think Hitler really wanted to invade Switzerland either. Maybe he didn't need the chocolate, and German clocks seem to work just as well as Swiss ones.

Erik
February 10, 2000, 02:05 PM
Pluspinc holds that you cannot train certain traits/reactions out of one'sself or others.

Others believe that it is all training.

Somewhere in the middle lies the truth, burried in the grey area of the debate.

That said, train, train, train... AND have the proper mindset <--- Now that's the trick most haven't learned.

Erik

pluspinc
February 10, 2000, 05:10 PM
Genetics are a key player we are finding out more so each day. The old thought, "some have it and some don't" is right on the money. I knew a fellow who got the highest grade point averate in University of Minnesota law chool in history. He could NOT however apply what he learned and never did pass the state bar exam.
Genetics will be our deciding factor in a real life and death encounter, much more so than training, even if the "skill" is to flee.
Wish I had more room to explain it, but the science is now there of genetic behavior vs environmentally learned behavior. Predispositional impact on behavior is now valid in English courts. It is a form of "the devil made me do it." In our case the devil is our ancestors before us.
As for mind set, when frightend that is stripped from us and brings forth a genetic pre-programmed response for us. When in a state of fright our mind won't care about laws, rules, morals or liability. It WILL do whatever it takes to survive.
That is one reason you see so many bites in fights. A neanderthal genetic response.
With the science now available to us we will have to start to include making ourselves aware of this state of mind that can cause some serious problems. The mind doesn't like organized formal complex things when it thinks it is in danger.
Of all the martial arts the one I have seen used that worked was indeed JUDO. It isn't as fancy or trendy, but at a prison near where I was a cop an oriental corrections officer was targeted in a riot. Before he was beaten half to death he got five of them and put each into the hospital down the hall from where they put him. This included tossing a couple OVER a railing allowing them to fall two tiers. They out weighed him by 100 pounds.
To this day nobody will screw with him.
Interesting thread and I hope we all print a few responses out and think them over. Lots of good seeds in this mess. :-)

fubsy
February 10, 2000, 06:37 PM
Eric, I think there is truth in that statement, but is not a new concept. Any athlete that excells in physcial environment most likely has the genetics required, combined with training. Does that mean you cant take a person of not quite the same genetics and train them to a point were they are better than they would have been with out practice? Pavlov trained what, mice to react to stimiulus, isnt that what were talking about as well? It too is well documented. Now does that mean all people handle stress well? I certainley dont believe its all training either, but I do think you can become better through training. It would seem that until a person loses his rationality he's capable of utilizing his skills, but once he panics his ability suffers.sorta like "buck fever" at hunting season? The reason I say it is not new is the old saw about....not panicing and there was a very famous martial artist who developed an entire style around the concept of flight and fight, he felt that it was better not to have trained in extensive pre programmed moves, because everyone reacts differently. Of course that was after he had spent many years studying with yip man, and a life time of daily practice....yep thats right practice even going to the point of developing his own practice equipment......interesting thread but we are talking about old concepts that are general knowledge....fubsy.
""Pluspinc holds that you cannot train certain traits/reactions out of one'sself or others.
Others believe that it is all training.

Somewhere in the middle lies the truth, burried in the grey area of the debate.""

That said, train, train, train... AND have the proper mindset <--- Now that's the trick most haven't learned.

Erik

fubsy
February 10, 2000, 06:54 PM
plusp,
""Genetics will be our deciding factor in a real life and death encounter, much more so than training, even if the "skill" is to flee.""
......are we talking about controlling panic? What about people that jump out of airplanes?---now that would panic me, but dont they get trained in such a way as to enforce that they can safely do this? Is this close to what you mean?
""Wish I had more room to explain it, but the science is now there of genetic behavior vs environmentally learned behavior. Predispositional impact on behavior is now valid in English courts. It is a form of "the devil made me do it." In our case the devil is our ancestors before us."""
......Ok, Ive got to throw this wrench in, what if Im genetically attracted to only blonde women, and Im a rapist----surely that couldnt be used as a defense.
""As for mind set, when frightend that is stripped from us and brings forth a genetic pre-programmed response for us. When in a state of fright our mind won't care about laws, rules, morals or liability. It WILL do whatever it takes to survive.""
....panic again?
""That is one reason you see so many bites in fights. A neanderthal genetic response.""
....I wasnt aware that they had conclusively linked us to neanderthals, but I have bitten not out of fear but that was the only opening i had,,,I was about 7.
""With the science now available to us we will have to start to include making ourselves aware of this state of mind that can cause some serious problems. The mind doesn't like organized formal complex things when it thinks it is in danger.
Of all the martial arts the one I have seen used that worked was indeed JUDO. It isn't as fancy or trendy, but at a prison near where I was a cop an oriental corrections officer was targeted in a riot. Before he was beaten half to death he got five of them and put each into the hospital down the hall from where they put him. This included tossing a couple OVER a railing allowing them to fall two tiers. They out weighed him by 100 pounds.
To this day nobody will screw with him.""
........Good for him, this could be interesting here, was he raised around a culture of judo or marital arts? Did he practice and how long had he been practicing? What was his mindset prior to the incident, had he already made up his mind to fight no matter what?......fubsy.........your right good thread.
Interesting thread and I hope we all print a few responses out and think them over. Lots of good seeds in this mess. :-)

pluspinc
February 11, 2000, 05:58 AM
plusp,
""Genetics will be our deciding factor in a real life and death encounter, much more so
than training, even if the "skill" is to flee.""
......are we talking about controlling panic? What about people that jump out of airplanes?---now that would panic me, but dont they get trained in such a way as to
enforce that they can safely do this? Is this close to what you mean?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Kinda. Keep in mind in the jumping the use a static chord because often fearful jumpers "forget" to pull it. Even in seasoned and veteran jumpers many "fail to perform" such as easy tasks to clear fouled lines, or even engage a reserve. Everyone is stumped at what happened even with a lot of experience. We can not control FRIGHT or manage it. Once that line is crossed it is a genetic response with little room (very little) for information processing. We can train to keep from crossing that line from fear to fright, but a lot of things will influence that. Training on how to avoid a fight will be far more valuable than trying to apply training once it begins. Once the fight begins your odds of winning are far slimmer than if you avoid the fight. Being IN the fight puts us at incredible risk since we will be engaged in an unorganized and no rules encounter. Ho well do you think a championship team would do against another team with NO rules even if the bad guys had NO training. That is why in cop killings the untrained bad guys have a 91% HIT rate vs trained cops 92% MISS rate. That should give you a clue.

""Wish I had more room to explain it, but the science is now there of genetic behavior vs
environmentally learned behavior. Predispositional impact on behavior is now valid in English courts. It is a form of "the devil made me do it." In our case the devil is our ancestors before us."""
......Ok, Ive got to throw this wrench in, what if Im genetically attracted to only blonde women, and Im a rapist----surely that couldnt be used as a defense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The blonde thing probably not. But illegal, violent behavior could. Ever hear someone say, "he has bad blood?" Genetic predispositional behavior is now moving into our courts as a defense. You will hear more about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
""As for mind set, when frightend that is stripped from us and brings forth a genetic pre-programmed response for us. When in a state of fright our mind won't care about laws, rules, morals or liability. It WILL do whatever it takes to survive.""
....panic again?
>>>>>>
NO FRIGHT. FRIGHT is not panic, but probably the terms have some interchange. FRIGHT is a strange creature. I find it a very interesting study with precious little to research.

""That is one reason you see so many bites in fights. A neanderthal genetic response.""
>>>>>>>>>>>
....I wasnt aware that they had conclusively linked us to neanderthals, but I have bittenot out of fear but that was the only opening i had,,,I was about 7.
>>>>>>>>>>>
You prove the concept well. At 7 you had NO training and resorted (kids often do this) to your genetics. You didn't have to learn to bite. It is an inbred defense system. Didn't a boxer just do this? I don't think he was hungry.

""With the science now available to us we will have to start to include making ourselves aware of this state of mind that can cause some serious problems. The mind doesn't like organized formal complex things when it thinks it is in danger.
Of all the martial arts the one I have seen used that worked was indeed JUDO. It isn't as
fancy or trendy, but at a prison near where I was a cop an oriental corrections officer
was targeted in a riot. Before he was beaten half to death he got five of them and put
each into the hospital down the hall from where they put him. This included tossing a
couple OVER a railing allowing them to fall two tiers. They out weighed him by 100
pounds. To this day nobody will screw with him.""
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

........Good for him, this could be interesting here, was he raised around a culture of judo or marital arts? Did he practice and how long had he been practicing? What was his mindset prior to the incident, had he already made up his mind to fight no matter what?......fubsy.........your right good thread.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The officer in that case was oriental with a long long family history in martial arts and I would be safe in saying it was to the level of religion. It was daily for him, not just a hobby. Until this riot he had never really used it. He was also not a very imposing figure at about 5-8 and 140=160 lbs. I loved to hear him talk about martial arts. He said, "the victory is obtained with the mind, not with the muscle." He love to OUT THINK the thugs.

Art Eatman
February 11, 2000, 10:12 AM
Bringing up mind and attitude again. I've spent a lot of time in car racing, working cattle from horseback in mesquite brush, hunting alone in very rugged mountain country, and bending a lot of wrenches on cars.

Bumps and bruises and cuts and gashes.

Some 20 years or so back, I started persuading myself that pain isn't a cause for "the shakes" or puzzlement; it's a cause for anger or rage. "How DARE that rock roll under my foot?" or "How DARE that mesquite limb slap me in the face?" "How DARE that mountain lion growl at me?"

You don't get the shakes, you don't go into shock, you're not nearly as confused. You're just irate, dad-gum MAD! Of course, the induced adrenalin flow will wear off, but by then you've coped with the problem.

So that's part of my response-system when faced by a human predator. I'll do my limited best, hair, teeth and eyeballs.

Hmmm. With ever-more "falsies" in my partial plate, maybe I could do some tooth-sharpening? :)

Art

Skorzeny
February 11, 2000, 10:47 AM
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu comes from Kodokan Judo. You add wrestling takedowns (also present in Judo, but considered less elegant and not as often used as "classical" hip throws, for example), punching and kicking (atemi-waza, also present in Judo, but no longer really taught) and a bit more emphasis on ground work (Ne-Waza) and also add some "forbidden" submissions (like ankle locks and knee bars) to Judo and you've got BJJ. Basically, BJJ is an evolution of the pre-WWII (that is to say, pre-sports) Kodokan Judo.

I always consider current sports Judo to be a great understudy for BJJ. It is less "violent" and less "practical" than BJJ, but teaches great basic skills (falls, throws, pins and escapes) and a great deal of sportsmanship. It's great for women and kids before they start BJJ.

Fubsy:

I mean no offense, but I get the feeling that you don't really have much knowledge of grappling, because you say things like "it's too easy to be smothered on the ground if you are weaker or smaller." That's absolutely nonsense if you know even a little bit of BJJ, Judo, Sambo or Shooto. Sure, if the skill levels are similar or only a little different, then the weight and strength make the difference. However, if the skill levels are more than a little different, weight and strength make almost no difference in the outcome. There is more to grappling than the UFC. UFC and the state of grappling arts nowadays are a world apart. In addition, unlike in the earlier days, UFC now has a tons of rules that favor strikers (standup rules, rounds, time limits, ad naseum) and is no longer a good battle "laboratory."

It is nowadays also a well known fact that pure grapplers (Judo, BJJ, Sambo) will 9 times out of 10 defeat pure strikers (Karate, kickboxing, boxing), because grapplers specifically train to avoid strikes, clinch and finish the fight on the ground whereas strikers mainly (perhaps only) train to fight other strikers (usually of the same style).

The other reason why grappling is more appropriate for self-defense than striking is this: if you are able to stand up on your feet and "square off" like boxers to fight, you should really run away. You should only really fight if you absolutely have to and those situations usually involve getting tackled, choked, grabbed and bear hugged. This is especially true for women. I have been in tons of actual street fights when I was younger, more foolish and had some "issues" and seldom (almost never) did I "square off" with my opponents. They almost always happened so fast that punching and kicking ranges were crossed in a blink of the eye (yeah, that Tae Kwon Do blackbelt really did not help).

Also, If I had to pick a style of striking, it won't be boxing. It will be Muay Thai (which is one of the things I train in). It takes a great deal of practice to make hands and feet work well. It is comparatively much easier to work with elbows and knees. They are also much harder than fists and feet (BTW, fists and feet shatter, break and fracture very easily without gloves and protective gear). Elbows and knees also work at a more realistic range than fists and feet (that range is crossed too quickly in a real fight - you won't get more than a shot or two before the trapping/grappling/elbow/knee range).

This isn't just my opinion. It is the opinion shared by many of today's top unarmed fighting instructors in the world, those who train in both grappling and striking (and knife-stick fighting). They almost to a man advocate cross training, but "if you had to learn only one system," they invariably recommend a grappling system based on leverage like BJJ (as opposed to something like Greco-Roman wrestling).

Incidentally, BJJ is now (as of 2000) an offical part of the US Army Rangers unarmed fighting curriculum. Plans are now in place to teach the basics of BJJ to almost 400,000 US military pesonnel next year (2001).

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

fubsy
February 11, 2000, 03:37 PM
"""Fubsy:

I mean no offense, but I get the feeling that you don't really have much knowledge of grappling, because you say things like "it's too easy to be smothered on the ground if you are weaker or smaller." That's absolutely nonsense if you know even a little bit of BJJ, Judo, Sambo or Shooto. Sure, if the skill levels are similar or only a little different, then the weight and strength make the difference. However, if the skill levels are more than a little different, weight and strength make almost no difference in the outcome."""
.....Im not offended by your opinion or view. I believe we are comparing apples and oranges here, Im talking about taking someone who has no experience and bringing them to a level of confidence with skills that should allow them to be able to defend themselves with out a commited martial lifestyle change. Im not referring to highly trained competiors....the implication is such that i can infer that never absoultely never has a non-grappler beat someone trained in the system you favor by outstrenghting them on the ground is that what your trying to say? Using our 110lb male or female? I have studied primarily issinryu and have only dabbled in the judo, jujitsu for about a year, not long, before I moved. Weather you care to believe it or not I have taken a 110lb guy to the ground and locked him up by strength. I like the stuff, I am not convinced that mr or mrs 110 lbs can go up against a strong determined attacker and be able to use all that with out training a lot. Unless I allowed some of the smaller folks to do the move it wasnt going to happen, now once they got it would work, if I couldnt break it. skorzeny, Im not arguing the effectiveness of judo or jujitsu I think it is effective with training, Idont think its necessarily the all to end all. I dont know of one martial system that is. I dont claim expertese in any of these fighting systems....i have nothing to gain from promoting one form over another.
""There is more to grappling than the UFC. UFC and the state of grappling arts nowadays are a world apart. In addition, unlike in the earlier days, UFC now has a tons of rules that favor strikers (standup rules, rounds, time limits, ad naseum) and is no longer a good battle "laboratory.""""
.......I saw some of the films put out early on and was impressed by some of the stuff, Ive never really considered it a "battle laboratory", sorry just dont. It might be as good as it gets for civilized fighting. (what an oxymoron)..

"""It is nowadays also a well known fact that pure grapplers (Judo, BJJ, Sambo) will 9 times out of 10 defeat pure strikers (Karate, kickboxing, boxing), because grapplers specifically train to avoid strikes, clinch and finish the fight on the ground whereas strikers mainly (perhaps only) train to fight other strikers (usually of the same style).""
....No doubt in my mind that once clenching starts and you go to the ground your right. Now lets throw in multiple attackers, lets throw in a knife, hmmmmmmmmm---I believe in people carrying weapons, and I realize this takes it to another realm.

""The other reason why grappling is more appropriate for self-defense than striking is this: if you are able to stand up on your feet and "square off" like boxers to fight, you should really run away. You should only really fight if you absolutely have to and those situations usually involve getting tackled, choked, grabbed and bear hugged. This is especially true for women."""
........Boxers do not have to square to throw an effective punch but it definitely helps, and all of the above can be used against you ......running unfourtunately isnt always an option but should be utilized if possible, """"I have been in tons of actual street fights when I was younger, more foolish and had some "issues" and seldom (almost never) did I "square off" with my opponents.""""
....so let me get this straight, when you were fighting in the street you never squared off but "boxer's will", most of the boxers I know come from the street.
""They almost always happened so fast that punching and kicking ranges were crossed in a blink of the eye (yeah, that Tae Kwon Do blackbelt really did not help).""
......fast is the operative word, but answer me this in all those tons of streets fights you had (prior to learning grappling), did they all go to the ground? tkd has become a great sport imo.

""Also, If I had to pick a style of striking, it won't be boxing. It will be Muay Thai (which is one of the things I train in). It takes a great deal of practice to make hands and feet work well."""
..........That is entirely my point,I think it takes more time than most people will train to become proficient in its use and not just muy thai, or grappling or Karate, or savate --to become proficient you have to put in the time..
"""It is comparatively much easier to work with elbows and knees. They are also much harder than fists and feet (BTW, fists and feet shatter, break and fracture very easily without gloves and protective gear). Elbows and knees also work at a more realistic range than fists and feet """
.......I agree with the damage you can do to your self, Ive done some and had some done to me. I get the impression that you dont think elbows and knees arent taught in Karate, and no one in boxing has ever thrown an elbow....""""(that range is crossed too quickly in a real fight - you won't get more than a shot or two before the trapping/grappling/elbow/knee range)."""
........It most certainley can be and these things happen in a whirlwind.

""""This isn't just my opinion. It is the opinion shared by many of today's top unarmed fighting instructors in the world, those who train in both grappling and striking (and knife-stick fighting). They almost to a man advocate cross training, but "if you had to learn only one system," they invariably recommend a grappling system based on leverage like BJJ (as opposed to something like Greco-Roman wrestling)."""
.....I know of no one who would discard something that works no matter where it comes from, I believe it could be successfully argued that most martial systems have borrowed heavily from each other most likely from the very beginning.
As far as who the "top unarmed instructors in world are", heck I wouldnt know who they are or who made them the top.

"""Incidentally, BJJ is now (as of 2000) an offical part of the US Army Rangers unarmed fighting curriculum. Plans are now in place to teach the basics of BJJ to almost 400,000 US military pesonnel next year (2001)."""
......it only makes sense, these guys are what carrying a appx 80-100lb pack and weapon, working on uneven terrain or wet environments, it could be very useful to these professionals who will train as their life depends on it.......fubsy.

Skorzeny
February 11, 2000, 06:15 PM
Fubsy:

Lets see... Where to start...

First of all, have you ever seen Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu at work (not just on TV, but with your own eyes or maybe fight/spar against it)?

When you say Jiu-Jitsu, I wonder if you mean classical Japanese Jiu-Jitsu or Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu? These two are a world apart. Frankly, Japanese Jiu-Jitsu, because it is taught statically against a cooperating opponent, is extremely difficult to put into effect unless one has literally decades of training (like Ueshiba Morihei, the founder of Aikido).

BJJ is taught with both static, cooperative training AND full force, dynamic sparring, which allows you learn to deal with unexpected or strong (or both) momvements by your opponent.

My wife is that 110lbs. person with very little muscle. She used to know next to nothing about fighting before she started BJJ and now, she can choke, armbar, leglock and do all sorts of nasty things against guys who are 175-200lbs. and untrained in grappling. They are very baffled and amazed. One second, they are trying to strangulate her and the next second, their elbows are hyper-extended and ready to break. Or they think that they are on top of her, and the next second their knees and ankles are ready to break from a heel hook.

I myself weigh 175lbs. and I have sparred (everything allowed except eye gouging, fish hooking, biting and groin grabs) with "blackbelts" in all sorts of Karate systems, amateur boxers as well as wrestlers with much greater weight than me (225-250lbs.) and have submitted them handily. I can't really think of any other system that would let me do that against such well trained, bigger athletes in a relatively realistic context.

You've got to see it with your own eyes to believe it. I urge you to go down to the local BJJ school if you can find one, find someone other than a rank beginner (and somone who weighs much less than you) and say "that Jiu-Jitsu stuff doesn't work on me. I can just overpower you and smother you." I guarantee you that you will get a free opinion adjustment. You may feel pain, but you won't get hurt permanently, because the chances are, you will tap or submit (or pass out from the carotid choke).

Almost all of my fights during my youth did indeed go to the ground. This is one of the reasons why I started to look for a grappling art eons ago. I think that my experience mirros those of many others.

Sure boxers can throw elbows. That's like saying a TKD practitioner can also throw a punch. See what I mean? I don't think that pure boxers really know the most effective bio-mechanics of an elbow strike nor can he really throw it with effectiveness and accuracy, because he does not train in it. I know many Karate systems that teach elbows and knees, but I have almost never seen them use them in a real fight or even in sparring. Training statically in elbows and knees aren't going to help. You have to use them full force (naturally with protective gear) against a dynamic, moving opponent to learn how to apply them effectively.

No Holds Barred events are excellent laboratories to see what works and what does not, depending on the rules (usually the less the better). They show what works in a mano-a-mano unarmed fight. Of course, multi-opponent and armed fights are different.

But if that is your argument against grappling, are you somehow suggesting that those systems which are ineffective in one-on-one fights (like most Karate systems, Japanese Jiu-Jitsu, etc. etc. ad naseum) some how magically become effective against armed or multiple opponents?

I have been in fights with more than one person (and with weapons) and I can tell you that unless you are incredibly and extraordinarily skilled AND the opponents are completely clueless, you will get seriously injured (and I was). If you have to deal with multi-opponents and/or armed opponents, you find an equalizer. And that is not BJJ, Karate, Judo, boxing etc. etc. You get yourself a rock, a ruler, a knife, a stick, a pistol, a shotgun or a rifle.

If you think that any amount of boxing or Isshinryu Karate is going to get you out safely against four guys who are decently athletic or are armed with knives, stick or whatever, you either saw too many Steven Seagal movies to know what real fights are like. Then, it really doesn't matter how much I try to convince you, isn't it?

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

Skorzeny
February 11, 2000, 06:21 PM
I forgot to mention the great Helio Gracie who is like 5'6" and 100lbs. and 80 years old, still spank the big wrestlers, Aikidoists, Karate practioners, boxers and etc. who show up to check out BJJ.

He was only defeated twice. Once to the reigning Japanese Judo champion, Kimura (who was mover 100lbs. heavier, over a decade younger and exceptionally skilled, perhaps the best Judoka who ever lived) in a grappling match and once in NHB to his top student who was twenty years younger in an epic 2 1/2 hour fight with almost no rules.

Show me a 5'6", 100lbs. 80 years old boxer who can fight and beat younger, bigger, stronger and more athletic boxers let alone other stylists.

That says a lot about the techniques (based on leverage) of BJJ.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

fubsy
February 11, 2000, 09:11 PM
skorzeny,
I thought I was pretty clear but apparently not....How long have you been in training? How long has your wife trained?, I wont even ask about Mr. Gracie. My point was and is most people will not dedicate the time necessary to become proficient. You disagree? How long does it take for someone in grappling to become proficient in self defense? Im not against grappling be it bjj, or shoote fighting or any thing that gives you an edge, period.
""Fubsy:
Lets see... Where to start...

"""First of all, have you ever seen Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu at work (not just on TV, but with your own eyes or maybe fight/spar against it)?""
.....Ok, My shoulder is healing from from my last go round but..do recommend someone in my area if you know of anyone and Ill go and check it out...I live near Inverness, fla.,...and I need a new place to workout and to learn new things.

""When you say Jiu-Jitsu, I wonder if you mean classical Japanese Jiu-Jitsu or Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu? These two are a world apart. Frankly, Japanese Jiu-Jitsu, because it is taught statically against a cooperating opponent, is extremely difficult to put into effect unless one has literally decades of training (like Ueshiba Morihei, the founder of Aikido)."""
.....No what we were working with was not bjj,...drawing a blank here....shoot, he's out of Clarksville Ky., he was one of the judges in the olympic judo in atlanta.....

BJJ is taught with both static, cooperative training AND full force, dynamic sparring, which allows you learn to deal with unexpected or strong (or both) momvements by your opponent.

My wife is that 110lbs. person with very little muscle. She used to know next to nothing about fighting before she started BJJ and now, she can choke, armbar, leglock and do all sorts of nasty things against guys who are 175-200lbs. and untrained in grappling. They are very baffled and amazed. One second, they are trying to strangulate her and the next second, their elbows are hyper-extended and ready to break. Or they think that they are on top of her, and the next second their knees and ankles are ready to break from a heel hook.

I myself weigh 175lbs. and I have sparred (everything allowed except eye gouging, fish hooking, biting and groin grabs) with "blackbelts" in all sorts of Karate systems, amateur boxers as well as wrestlers with much greater weight than me (225-250lbs.) and have submitted them handily. I can't really think of any other system that would let me do that against such well trained, bigger athletes in a relatively realistic context.

You've got to see it with your own eyes to believe it. I urge you to go down to the local BJJ school if you can find one, find someone other than a rank beginner (and somone who weighs much less than you) and say "that Jiu-Jitsu stuff doesn't work on me. I can just overpower you and smother you." I guarantee you that you will get a free opinion adjustment. You may feel pain, but you won't get hurt permanently, because the chances are, you will tap or submit (or pass out from the carotid choke).

Almost all of my fights during my youth did indeed go to the ground. This is one of the reasons why I started to look for a grappling art eons ago. I think that my experience mirros those of many others.

Sure boxers can throw elbows. That's like saying a TKD practitioner can also throw a punch. See what I mean? I don't think that pure boxers really know the most effective bio-mechanics of an elbow strike nor can he really throw it with effectiveness and accuracy, because he does not train in it. I know many Karate systems that teach elbows and knees, but I have almost never seen them use them in a real fight or even in sparring. Training statically in elbows and knees aren't going to help. You have to use them full force (naturally with protective gear) against a dynamic, moving opponent to learn how to apply them effectively.
.......sounds like you fight how you train..., One of the major concerns for me when i was looking to start back into was get realistic as I could, realizing that I still had to work that day. Im all for realistic training.

No Holds Barred events are excellent laboratories to see what works and what does not, depending on the rules (usually the less the better). They show what works in a mano-a-mano unarmed fight. Of course, multi-opponent and armed fights are different.

""""But if that is your argument against grappling, are you somehow suggesting that those systems which are ineffective in one-on-one fights (like most Karate systems, Japanese Jiu-Jitsu, etc. etc. ad naseum) some how magically become effective against armed or multiple opponents?""""
.......oh, good heavens no..I simply see multiple opponents as a sincere problem for any system grappling or standing, I sort of like a spyderco clipt defense against grabs..My argument is not against grappling.....its providing something that will work with out a years of dedication, most people will not train.

"""I have been in fights with more than one person (and with weapons) and I can tell you that unless you are incredibly and extraordinarily skilled AND the opponents are completely clueless, you will get seriously injured (and I was). If you have to deal with multi-opponents and/or armed opponents, you find an equalizer. And that is not BJJ, Karate, Judo, boxing etc. etc. You get yourself a rock, a ruler, a knife, a stick, a pistol, a shotgun or a rifle."""""
....I think ive been saying that, about weapons from the start. Mr. Colt had it right.

""""If you think that any amount of boxing or Isshinryu Karate is going to get you out safely against four guys who are decently athletic or are armed with knives, stick or whatever, you either saw too many Steven Seagal movies to know what real fights are like. Then, it really doesn't matter how much I try to convince you, isn't it?"""
......thats good, and if I believed something so ignorant you would be right. I tend to tailor everything I do as realistically as I can make it....I never was one for tournaments with point fighting and all that mess, cause I think it gives you bad habits---I choose issinryu because the folks there were going at it real good, they were a small school that didnt advertise and had been in business appx 20 years or so at the time. Im not promoting isshinryu as an alternative, I dont think its the all to end all, it is a solid foundation to go from, and has been for me.....Im not saying that grappling isnt a good compliment or good base to other fighting styles, I pass up nothing that helps, I think it requires more training then most people will give it......thats my point. Im not arguing the high school equivalent of "my team's better than Yours"....I also dont necessarily think most folks unless they just have the desire are going to get into it all the time....but as we all kn0w -it does happen.
Ive enjoyed the thread, and if you can direct me to someone In this area I would appreciate it.
.............fubsy.

stdalire
February 12, 2000, 01:27 AM
Pluspinc said:
"As for mind set, when frightend that is stripped from us and brings forth a genetic pre-programmed response for us. When in a state of fright our mind won't care about laws, rules, morals or liability. It WILL do whatever it takes to survive."

I agree 100% on this comment not just by a Hypothetical affirmation but I absolutely agree to this premise, as it did happen on my life several times. And even up to this time if my life and my family lives is at stake, I don't care any laws, rules, morals and liability, because survival or saving of my breath is the most important to be taken care of.

I observe that several poster is saying again that this type of Martial Arts is better or the best then this kind, well it is every one interpretation and opinions. As I have said, there is no such Martial Arts Style as the ultimate kind for self defense or better than the other. This can be proven if the Learner or Practioner have studied several style and they were in actual encounter.

I appreciate the one who said that all martial arts borrowed from one another the kind of techniques they have of their own and each martial arts will grow from that point. That is true, look at karate of any style, it has striking techniques, grabbing or grappling, as well as locking and breaking techniques.

Take an example of any karate style and that of Tae Kwon Do. Many strikes if not all or techniques of TKD are presents in Karate. There are many innovations of many Instructors that they combined Karate and Judo, or vice versa.

My MA at early age that I attend classes every night for 2 to 3 hrs is still the kind of martial arts I depend very well. The instructor called it, WADO Style and he combined it with Hapkido and few Aikido and I see it very effective. I was only given a belt of Green when I was in that Club for 2 yrs continuous study and practice, but got 1st Dan Black Belt under "Presas" when I fought with his assistants in a belting promotion competition, but I relied much on my early age martial arts foundation.

As I said when I was in Manila at my college yrs, I look every commercial club that offers the best MA style, but I found out that many are just innovation but not an original style which every instructor can do that. Any instructor who have studied long in karate, Judo and TKD or any MA - can mix all several techniques of these MA's and give a new name of it and put a club. But the truth the style they are teaching are just combination of several martial arts.

I know, Judo, Karate, Hapkido, Tae Kwondo, Kendo and Arnis but to my mind they have many in commons. And I still call my martial Arts Karate. If you combined all these we called it combat. Very rare, or none at all that is very distinct than the other martial arts style. Only stick fighting, arnis or escrima, kendo or sword fighting are very different among the barehands MA's. All barehands MA's are almost the same. Look TKD only active in using mostly of the feet, but any karate player can excel on any expertise he wants, good on the feet, hands, grabbing or grappling etc. Compare Aikido, Judo and Jujitsu. All are the same in taking advantage by using opponent force and apply straight or circular movements. With the BJJ as being mentioned I haven't seen one in my country teaching of this, but as was described that it a mixture of Judo, shotokan, etc., So, most of the techniques are all combination of the mentioned MA styles.

One asked how many of us had broken knuckles, fingers or the hand of hard practice. Well, it depends on our purpose and our personality to take all these training. In fact we don't need to continue having hard training as we get older but we use our mind and we should be wise. I think the "TRAINING SUBJECT WILL BE ANOTHER TOPIC".

Thank you for the good discussions.




[This message has been edited by stdalire (edited February 12, 2000).]

Svt
February 12, 2000, 12:15 PM
Nice thread guys! I thoroughly enjoyed reading it!

By practice it is meant the participation and acceptance of the Four Noble Truths: suffering, adapting, non-attachment, and practicing the Dharma. First comes suffering. When followers of the Way suffer, they should recall that in the countless previous incarnations they have been deterred from the path, sometimes becoming trivial and angry even without cause. The suffering in this life is a punishment, but also an opportunity to exercise what I have learned from past lives. Men and gods are equally unable to see where a seed may bear fruit. I accept this suffering as a challenge and with an open heart. In recognizing suffering, you enter onto the path to the Way.

------------------
Svt
RKBA!
NRA, GOA, VFW
Son's Place (http://users.desupernet.net/taos/)

Rangers Lead the Way

stdalire
February 13, 2000, 01:38 AM
Svt: What a nice philosophical anectodotes for the MA's and applicable to life also.

Yes, in all life be it in martial arts, suffering will comes first, for we trained hard to to reach our objective i.e. to hardened our knuckles, hands, feet, strong joints (but can be split to the extent)
and sufferings - to take the punches/strikes of the opponents/sparring mate in club or in actual fight. In those sufferings, we become stronger, developed a sense of maturity and becoming more wise and a winner the second time around when we are defeated in the first round.

Adaptation, it is true we must adapt to any kind of MA styles for what we know only might not be enough to counter other forces from other knowledge of different players. We adapt to the environment what particular MA to use. Like for instance myself, if I am in my province I depend much on my arnis if in case I'll be attacked by bolos or stick. Then perhaps you see several stick to use a substitute of the burnth rattan. Whilst if we are in a social gathering and some BG will do such nuisance for our ladies, then the clean barehands martial arts can be used such as karate, Judo, TKD or BJJ for there is no burnt rattan scattered around the corner. Well there are many weapons such as the chairs, tables, wine bottle, but we should be decent even in fighting not to spoil our dress and handsome faces, and these are all adaptation.

The challenges: we expect any trouble even on time of peace as the devils play its role from time to time as the Equilibrium of nature and unseen forces. Like Le Kuan Yew of singapore have stated, he is arming missile of his country even on time of peace for. The other ways definitions I will leave it to he rest to discuss.

As for the superiority of any MA's I remember a joke that one small size asian is sitting with big caucasian guy (be it american, european, or russian I don't know). The asian was sandwich between the two big guy in an open theater and cannot move freely anymore, what he did is he do lightning stomping kick to the feet of the guys and the big brothers look around who did that, not knowing it was done by the small man just behind them. So there are ways a small guy can deliver a blow and perhaps be in win-win situation over a big guy in Martial Arts.

To add with Svt's beautiful words, when we gain more knowledge in MA's and we got a black belt, as we get older and keep practicing, the black belt will become white for it is being used always. I compared that to martial artist, as we get older we are becoming wiser not depending anymore on the brute force of martial arts.

thank you,



[This message has been edited by stdalire (edited February 13, 2000).]

Chuck Ames
February 14, 2000, 05:03 AM
This is not meant as a flame to Pluspinc, but come on!!!!

I am so tired of hearing that genetics are so important. Genetics are an influencing factor, not determinitive.

Let's look at my family. I,the first child, am not very aggressive at all. My brother, on the other hand is. Why? Genetics? Let's look back at how we grew up. My little bro and I fought. As a youngster, I was bigger and stronger, so I had to hold back more. He on the other hand, gave it all he had (and still lost :-). He won a lot of fights as a teenager, and I lost a few.

I have since had to train some of my restraint out of me. Just because a scientist hypothesizes, or a court admits something as evidence doesn't mean it isn't crap, it just means someone convinces someone else of that crap don't stink!

There is plenty of evidence that genetics influence behavior (alcoholism, depression, etc.), however, so does environment (abuse, etc). There are plenty of people who have broken the cycle of nature/nurture. Never forget training, like the cop who fired 8 rounds from a revolver during a gunfight, and the investigators couldn't find the brass. It was in his pocket, just like he had been conditioned on the range. While it's certainly an example of how not to train, the fact is, training saves lives. I once had a disagreement with a First Sergeant who said, because we went to the range and used our holsters when we qualified, we trained with them. No, that is using your holster. Training involves repitition, and muscle memory.

Good training involves psychology and physiology. Conditioning allows us to better cope with the fight/flight reflex and have the feeling of "this sucks, but I've been here before." It is unnatural to kill one's own species, and an animalistic brawl is certainly not what we were designed for (hence the broken hands so often seen in fist fights). Thus the way is in training. Good training.

Miyamoto Musashi said, "The way of the warrior is death." Another author expounded on that and said that it is only when you accept you own death as inevitable, that you can truly be effective in a fight (badly paraphrased, I'm sorry). The point of course is that your mindset, more than your technique is decisive. If you allow yourself to SUCCUMB to fear, you will fail. If you experience it, then you are normal. If you have been trained and conditioned, then you will fight, and if you have accepted death, you will win decisively.

I'm just someone who is tired of science giving society excuses for failure.

Chuck

pluspinc
February 14, 2000, 05:29 AM
I'm just someone who is tired of science giving society excuses for failure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Science gives us a REASON for failure. Not an excuse. They are not the same. You you claim if we take 100 20 year old men off the street at random, expose all of them to the same training they will all have the same level of proficiency? Of course not. The military sure knows that as some win medals and some hide.
There are two types of behavior. One is genetic. The other is environmental. The separated twins study at the Univeristy of Minnesota clearly has shown over 20+ years that environmental behavior has far less influence than genetics. Much less in fact.
You may not like it, but you can't ignore it. Well you can I guess, but denial isn't a river in Egypt.
As Dirty Harry said, " a man has to know his limitations." I for one would never think that I could take any martial arts training and compete with it or rely on it. That is NOT me. I'm a gun person. I bet you know a lot of GREAT martial arts types that could hit a barn if they were in it with a gun.
And you can't always teach one to do the other. If we could my Husky would go pheasant hunting with me and point birds and retrieve.

stdalire
February 14, 2000, 08:44 AM
Chuck Ames have said: The point of course is that your mindset, more than your technique is decisive. If you allow yourself to SUCCUMB to fear, you will fail. If you experience it, then you are normal. If you have been trained and conditioned, then you will fight, and if you have accepted death, you will win decisively.

The above statements is what really I want to emphasize. Decisiveness and fear not to the outcome of a fight is one of the best factor to win or be in good shape in any dangers we encounter. Being trained and conditioned is the other factor to be in a win-win situation because we seems programmed to do things without hesitant or reservations. This includes conditioning of the mind to do such actions supported by the conditioned body. if a person has these criteria, for sure he is determined to all things he will do.

Sometimes, even the body is strong if the mind is weak, it will affect the physical body to act correctly. But there were times too, the physical body is not that strong but the mind will power is too strong, the unexpected great forces may emerge from us.

Thanks,

Gabe Suarez
February 14, 2000, 10:36 AM
In order of importance,
1). Attentiveness to Your Surroundings (sometimes difficult)
2). A developed mental/emotional attitude that can go to "animal" faster than the unfolding situation, and a willingness to to be violent (trainable)
3). A strong body that can take stress.
4). Finally, the least important, technical ability in BASIC FIGHTING TECHNIQUES.

Notice that the most important issues are Situational Awareness, and an attitude that is aggressive (not prey). We're all human. If Bruce Lee was ever taken by surprise, he'd go down like anybody else.

If you see a nasty situation developing, you can leave, although sometimes you cannot do that. If you must stay and fight, you must be more violent than the attacker. No one I've ever ever seen has won a fight with a good defense.

The techniques will be very basic and forceful. Three or four punches, three kicks (all below the waist to groin or legs), as well as some maneuvering (don't trip over yourself). Stay off the deck at all costs!

The reason most fights end up on the deck is that people close and lose balance. In police circles its due to the officer "trying to control rather than end the fight". UFC to the contrary, if you go to the deck with one man, his partner will stick an ice-pick in your back, or shoot you when you are "In the Mount".

The problem with most traditional arts is just that, they're arts. They are intended for things other than pure, ugly, dirty, unannounced-by surprise combat. Moreover, they are structured to keep students coming back for years to learn more and more techniques, and kata. It doesn't take twenty years of temple-living to be a warrior. You can learn to fight in a year if you are physically able, and keep yourself in shape.

I'd rather fight a guy who's studied for ten years, in poor physical condition, and never fought anyone for years, than a muscular ex-con with the right attitude!

Finally, if you carry weapons, you must be able to integrate them, and transition back and forth between them and your body weapons.

Gabe Suarez
HALO Group/Tactical Operator Newsletter http://www.thehalogroup.com

Skorzeny
February 15, 2000, 09:16 PM
Fubsy:

Where is Inverness, FL? What is the nearest major city? Orlando, Miami, Jacksonville? Once I have that information, I can tell you about the nearest BJJ school.

Mr. Suarez:

I certainly agree with much of what you wrote and I most certainly agree that one should TRY not to go to the ground unless one absolutely as to.

However, let me ask you this: what if your opponent takes you to the ground? What if he tackles you down or what if you and he clinch and then both fall to the ground? Then what? And consider that you may not be armed (I realize that YOU may always be armed, but let's assume for the moment that you are not armed OR that you had no chance to arm yourself).

It's all good and nice to say that one ought to have "good balance" and not fall, but the reality of many fights is that people tend to crash in, clinch and fall (or generally end up on the ground). This is the part that BJJ, Shooto, Sambo and other more combative ground fighting systems deal with.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

Gabe Suarez
February 16, 2000, 10:42 AM
Skorzeny,

You make some excelent points, and I agree with everything you said. Fighting on the ground is an important skill to have, but it must be kept in perspective. Its like placing all the emphasis on "weak handed" shooting. While its an important skill to have in the toolbox, it will probably not be used very often. And certainly no one in their right mind will want to use their "weak hand" on purpose. Its a similar issue with ground fighting.

No don't get me wrong, I am not for one minute saying I am "the world's best ground fighter" or any such nonsense. But what I AM saying is that we must keep it in perspective.

If you go to ground in a real fight - as opposed to "wrestling" with a belligerent friend, or a non-lethal encounter at a party or something, you will probably get kicked, stomped, stabbed, or shot in the back by your hapless opponent's friends. I've seen it a dozen times.

Not only that, but now, as you do the roll-around on the grainy, broken glas strewn asphalt (what no mats!!??) with your diry, smelly, diseased adverasry (criminals are generally dirty people), you are exposed to all his germs, blood, and other body fluids (Even though the PC Docs say you can't catch stuff that way, I don't want to find out). After filling out "Exposure to airborne and blood borne pathogens forms" more times that I can remember, going to the deck is NOT my Plan A.

If I end up on the deck, I will try to do as much physical damage as I can to the other guy (stabbing, biting, gouging, breaking fingers, ripping out eyes, etc.) because I consider the act of taking me to the deck an illustration of his intent to use deadly force against me.

As for always being armed, I do a good bit of traveling and consulting in what some call "non-permissive" environments where I can't really have my usual battery of doom-delivery systems. But I try to always be armed with something, even if its just a sharp #2 Ticonderoga.

Grappling is good, Ground Fighting is better, not having do deploy those emergency techniques in a fight because you stayed on your feet is best of all.

Cheers,

Gabe Suarez - HALO Group http://www.thehalogroup.com

fubsy
February 16, 2000, 03:23 PM
Skorzeny,
Im reasonably in the boonies although not quite like it used to be......the eaisest way is probably to locate Ocala, which is the largest city that Im near. find Ocala on the map and head to the gulf and Im not to far from it.......lets see maybe, brooksville might have something it has grown up a lot since I left this area. Gainsville might a place as well, although its a bit of a drive....hope that helps...fubsy.

Spectre
February 18, 2000, 10:11 PM
Chuck and Gabe,

Good take.

Skorzeny, I agree that weapons should be used if an option (if we couldn't run). I disagree with your statements regarding koryu arts. I feel that learning to fight (to use your example) from sitting on the floor can only enhance the times when not encumbered with such a starting position.

Genetics is a factor, but it isn't the genetics that is making the punches against me move slower, now.

Skorzeny
February 20, 2000, 02:22 AM
Fubsy:

It appears that there is no BJJ school near where you live. However, check http://bjj.org/academies/ and click on "Florida" and see if there is an academy near you.

Even if only once, I really urge you to check out BJJ. I think that you will find it to be very unique and effective in its approach to fighting. Unlike many "traditional" arts like TKD, Wing Chun, Karate and whatnot, BJJ has been found to be extremely effective in realistic (if not quite "real") simulations or substitutes of street fights such as no-holds barred fighting contests of various kinds.

In fact, unlike point-fighting or "traditional" tournaments where the participants still hold on to their traditional "pure" techniques, no-holds barred fighters everywhere, be they in Japan, Europe or the United States, have all taken to incorporating BJJ techniques into their arsenal. I am avid observer of this type of contests/fighting and I keep track of these events in the US, Japan and Europe. Whether boxers, Karate-men, Judoka, Muay Thai kickboxers or Shootfighters, they now all train in some sort of BJJ/ground techniques if they participate in minimum-rules, NHB events.

Mr. Suarez:

Again, I don't mean to be argumentative here, but do you really believe that in the scenario that we are discussing (no weapons and being tackled or somehow falling to the ground with an attacker), you can effectively use finger-breaking, eye-gouging or using improvised weapons?

I don't know whether you have tried this (you probably have, being a trainer of leathal force and all), but my training partners (including my "little" wife) and I sometimes have our opponents put on some heavy gloves, some minimal safety gear and then have them get on our top (the mount) and have them beat on us while we try to escape or submit them.

In our experience, in most of those situations, there is simply no time to try to break fingers, gouge eyes or try to deploy (in our case) simulated knives, while blows are raining down on our faces from the top. Besides, the assailant is in better position to do those things than you are.

What worked best for all of us has been the basic mount escape BJJ/Vale Tudo technique of 1) a little mini-"oompa" to make the person stop punching temporarily (because he has to base or "brace" himself with his hands or risk being thrown off), 2) hold his head with one arm, trap one of his arms with the other arm and hook on same side foot, 3a) bridge and oompa to the trapped side and now you are on top (though in his "guard") or 3b) bridge, then sink back to the ground and then use the space between two of you to put on a heel hook (which will break at minimum the knee and possibly the ankle and the hip joints as well).

Also, utilizing your analogy of ground fighting techniques as something akin to weak-hand shooting, I'll say this: you sure would practice that a lot if during 90% of your gunfights, your strong-hand became disabled, wouldn't you?

While it may not be exactly 90%, many people report that a great majority of fights do go to the ground for whatever reasons and this often negates the possibility of using stand-up techniques often taught my more traditional arts.

Also, you cite the possibility of being attacked by a second assailant during grappling. This is certainly true. But let me ask you this: if you are standing up and exchanging punches and kicks with one man, wouldn't it be also possible for his friend(s) to approach you from behind and do the same things to you (like stabbing you in the back with an icepick like you wrote)? It seems to me, you generally lose when you fight against more than one person whether you use BJJ or any other fighting system. So, I believe that this isn't a particular, unique weakness for BJJ only.

By the way, Mr. Suarez, do you have any experience or training in BJJ, Sambo, Shooto or other similar realism-oriented grappling/ground fighting arts?

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

Ivanhoe
February 21, 2000, 03:02 AM
I'll stick my ignorant snout in here for a second, and note that in between the "go to the mat whenever possible" and "avoid the mat whenever possible" extremes, there is perhaps a need to know how to get from your current predicament to a state in which you have an advantage?

thus, the boxer/kicker needs to know how to get out of grapples and back to punch/kick range, and the grappler needs to know how to close against a skilled boxer/kicker. I'm sure others have stated this idea more clearly elsewhere. based on the few bar fights I've seen, transitioning between ranges is as important as anything else (2nd thing would be how to finish & disengage before the bouncers arrive to eject the defender). it would be interesting to me how you folks evaluate the various MA in that respect.



[This message has been edited by Ivanhoe (edited February 21, 2000).]

stdalire
February 21, 2000, 07:33 AM
Ivanhoe stated "...thus, the boxer/kicker needs to know how to get out of grapples and back to punch/kick range, and the grappler needs to know how to close against a skilled boxer/kicker".

That is what I have said from the very start that there is no such thing as MA Style being the best or superior among others as self defense.

Sometimes, there were instances where a no MA person can surprisely attack another and can knockdown nor did not give any chance to the the opponent to deliver a strike.

When I don't have yet any formal schooling in MA's I resulted to my provincial training of no-hold-barred. As long as the fight started each of the fighter will go on till one cannot stand anymore. In one occassion, a school mate of mine who just don't like my face walk beside me while I am walking infront of our school and keeps saying nasty words, suddenly he just side step and kick at my side. He landed his good side kick on my ribs and my school uniform was even torn with his shoes heel perhaps. I cannot fight back as he is really good.

What I did, the following morning, when I saw the guy sitting at our school gate. I did not show any act of vengeance, but when I was near to him, I immediately and continuously punch his head/face while he is still sitting, and mind you he was not able to fight back. That was a surprise attack from me to the karate man.

Now the point is: I calculated when I attacked and I made a surprise attacked (it may be called treachery) but I was determined to do it for I pre meditated to do such action.

So, it is like Ivanhoe said, ....to know how to get out...... needs to know how to close against a .......

Talking again from experience... a particular Mr. X in my country who has a lot of shooting experiences of rifle. We are great enemies, but out of court records. After all what he did to me, I have decided to make a vengeance. I was decided to kill him on that moment. One time I saw that he is not holding his rifle... I went to him directly to stab him with my balisong for I want to kill him but one of my grand father not knowing that he is at my back immediately hold my hands with the knife, "it is not imposible for our old folks to stop someone with knife" many Filipinos too are expert in knife. Then the rifle man was able to ride on his motorcycle to escape but still I regain myself and run after him but it is already out of my reach. He went to his detachment to get his rifle but I am already out of range that time when he was able to come back. I did all these for vengeance for all things he did to me and my family. The guy leave our place for fear of his life also, and even until now that he return to my locality, if he see me he is not getting near to me or hoping our way won't get cross.

Previously, I am trying to edit my writings to refrain of hurting ones feeling, but now I need to say all things in putting all the necessary elements of it in a way to see the reality in real self defense. Theory is very much different than those who really experienced the actual happening.

It is like a soldier, a soldier cannot be called combatant if he is just in the four corners of his office room till he retire. The same with a martial arts player, he is nothing if he did not proven or have been in real street fight, not necessarily to kill or get killed.

Sometimes, also, environment would be taken into consideration. There are places in my country in the rural areas where there is really danger and professionalism and waiting for imminent danger before you react will put you at disadvantage position.

My other purpose in showing this example is, if a person is provoked much or afraid that his life will be taken first by evils, then a true self defense is Determination and no hesitation to consumate his intention.

Again, sometimes, training is not a guarranty you're a 100% ready. I'll give you example.

I am with a two friend soldier in one house, we were having a get together, a seven (7) communist guerilla knock and when I opened the front door, they declare they are communist and immediately looked for the 2 soldiers. But with my amazement, my two friend soldiers were out of my sight already, so I was left thereat. When I asked the other 5 rebels to get inside the house, they refused so, what I did I just went out to talk with their commander using my knowledge in talking things pertaining to activism in college and I was able to avert a confrontation.

To make the story short, after almost 3 hrs talking they left.

I look for my two soldier friends, I found out one of them is on the attic and the other one was able to escape when he sense the people outside the house were communist. Of course the house area cannot be cordoned as there are only 7 in numbers.

What the communist told me, why I did not run from them, if I did that they told me I will be shot for they think I will get a gun inside the house. I am just thankful they did not get me with them. The barrio officials went to the Police detachment (4 kilometers away) but they dared not to respond to the emergency call for they think it is a bait and they will be ambushed on the way.

Now, with the stories I gave you, running sometimes is not a good move for self defense, it may caused death also. Surprise is a good element also. My two soldiers friend were surprised too.

Hope the stories I gave can give you some perspective in real self defense.

Thank you,

Gabe Suarez
February 21, 2000, 11:31 PM
Skorzeny - I don't consider you argumentative at all. Quite to the contrary, a pro must be able to explain why he beleives a certain way, or why not.

I've trained in Ju-jitsu ( from a japanese, not Brazilian), and a bunch of other arts, some of which trained in ground 'fighting". I think Brazilian Ju Jitsu is a great art, and know one of the Gracie family personally. But even he agrees that if there are three bad guys, the technique to use comes from Austria (he was joking about the Glock-Waza).

Regarding breaking fingers, I broke my left thumb when I was trying to "control" a gan-member about a year ago. Nasty stuff - broken thumbs, but I did practice a great deal of one-handed shooting!

A few other times, the finger breaking, and other things was on the other end. One officer I know was pinned and mounted. he almost evicerated his attacker with a Spyderco Civilian. He was reprimanded for carrying a knife, but he's still alive.
Suffice to say that its not difficult. Also, if you are being pummeled, you will likely have at least one hand free to get whatever you need to get.

Sure, you may not be able to do so, and in that case, the techniques you mention are just the ticket.

I think the bottom line is that to be complete 'warriors" we must know how to fight on all surfaces and in all battlefields. Some battlefields are more dangerous than others, and to be avoided...unless they are unavoidable.

Gabe Suarez
HALO Group http://www.thehalogroup.com

Skorzeny
February 22, 2000, 09:46 AM
Mr. Suarez:

Thank you for your very reasonable and logical response. I certainly applaud the officer in question for utilizing his knife effectively and saving himself from trouble.

I certainly carry a pocket knife myself (a Gerber E-Z Out, though I always meant to get a Spyderco) and fully intend to put it to good use if deadly force is being used against me. I may not have made it clear, but I would certainly rather use my knife (and on my feet) than be grappling (like I've said before repeatedly, grappling is the "last ditch" thing). Of course, what I would "like" and what actually happens in a fight are two different things (if I had "my way," a fight would not have started in the first place, I guess, and even then I'd rather end a fight quickly with an elbow or two and a knee or two).

If you are not too uncomfortable dropping names, may I ask who the Gracie family member you know personally is?

BTW: thanks for carrying out this dialog with me. It's been fun, to say the least.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

dwightvdb
February 27, 2000, 02:19 AM
http://www.americancombatives.com/

A disturbing brutal and wonderfully effective form of close-quarter combat was taught to the Allied operatives of WWII. It has all but disappeared, having been replaced by strip-mall martial arts studios. An example of the philosophy: even Gracie JuJitsu is a joke compared to CQB. If you allow a fight to go to the ground ("grappling"), you're a dead man, because as you're gaining an advantage through your superior wrestling skills and working your way into a submission hold, the thug's friend will walk over and puncture you with a knife. American Combatives is one of perhaps four or five similar organizations in the world that teach how to incapacitate or kill a man in a few seconds. I was a Marine in Vietnam, and I thought that the USMC close-quater combat system was one of the most effective hard-core fighting systems in the world, until I ran across John Gary of AC. Since then I've studied the CQB field in some depth, and have discovered that the old WWII commando techniques seem to be experiencing something of a renaissance, in othe schools as well. I think that's the good news and the bad news: it won't be long before the bad guys learn this stuff, too. Right now there's a lot of pride and discipline in keeping the techniques private, and requiring proof of good character in one form or another (ie, CCW) before being admitted to training. Sooner or later, though, it will all be out in the open.

As a sort of poetic justice, another equally brutual and effective CQB form was developed by the KGB and used throughout the cold war. It's a little too much even for me to read the techniques, as many of them are designed for abduction off the street of, shall we say, interviewees, and subsequent encouragement of them to relate important information that they might otherwise have preferred to keep to themselves. But such study does go a long way to motivating a person to learn to defend himself, as it becomes quite clear quite quickly how incredibly vulnerable the human body is to focused and knowledgable forcible breach.

Martial arts are for sport, fitness, belonging to an elite group, and (the better ones like sambo, Thai boxing, escrima, and jujitsu) real-world fighting. They take years to learn well, and support various forms of training which may include sparring and katas. Martial arts teach you how to trade blows with the enemy.

If you want to learn trade blows, study a martial art. But have no illusions that such study will make even the slightest difference in a real-world encounter. It may, in fact, get you killed, as if you had sheepishly stood by and let the bad guy take your wallet instead of throwing a side kick at him, he might have let you survive.

I'm here as a third-generation warrior, with a son who's a sergeant in the Rangers, to tell you: never trade blows with the enemy. Put that thought far out of your mind. Never even consider trading blows with the enemy.

You try never to strike anyone, ever. Walk away. He calls your wife a slut; walk away. Run if you must. He pees on you and laughs, and his friends laugh. Ignore it; walk away. He's drunk and throws a sucker roundhouse punch at you; move to the side, tie him up, hand him to his friends, and walk away. Unless he's threatening someone with lethal damage, unless a life is on the line, you walk away.

You try never to strike anyone, but when you must, you strike only one blow. Only one, but such a harsh one that your enemy can never, never strike back.

Usually that's enough, but if it isn't, you strike again in the same way, and again, until there is no threat left.

A concrete example. Ever notice that the supposedly no-holds-barred Octagon rules prohibit eye gouges and neck hits? These are two of the most destructive and effective blows there are. If he's right in front of you and coming at you, slip your fingers in a claw up the front of his face from below and jam them right into his eyes, full bore. He won't see them coming up like that. End of fight. Or, he's coming at you from the side. Spin and deliver the bottom outside of your wrist, hand open like a movie "karate chop", right into the Adam's apple, full force, crushing his trachea, perhaps killing him.

How long does it take to learn this kind of system? Maybe five or six hours. It's not that hard. There are five or six blows (I've given you two of them) and four or five places to strike. Blocks are simple, just enough to get out of the way of an attack in order to strike. No stance, no punching, no deep flexibility, no kicks above the knee level. They're not needed. Just a few very simple sequences that are applied over and over, in this situation and in that.

Weapons? A knife is good. Lots known about what works, from WWII, where they had to use them over and over and over, and came back with reports on what worked and what didn't. Guns are good, but forget getting a good sight picture. You gotta learn to shoot in the dark, when there's lots of noise and smoke and flashing lights and danger and adrenalin pumping through your veins. The last thing in the world that you'll be looking at is your front sight, so you'd better learn to point the gun where you're looking.

It's more than a little troubling to see each strip-mall studio claim that its form is the most street effective martial art in the world, when even their star students and teachers could probably be taken out in three seconds by the average college coed who knew any of the authentic CQB forms. Not in a match, of course, but in an alley at night.

And, like pluspinc, I cringe at the firearms instructors who preach the gospel of the Weaver stance and locking in on the front sight.

I guess I'm becoming a curmudgeon. I kind of like it.

Dwight

stdalire
February 27, 2000, 03:26 AM
Dwight: I just get a few minutes off of doing some work and I have read now your post. You have demonstrated some of the simple effective strikes where there is no need of so much style to apply during a real fight but are effective.

For my observation, every human being has their own way in dealing a fight effectively. I noticed, that there are many school of martials with different school of thoughts as well as style. The same as to School of Guns.

All schools of Martial Arts and Gun Shooting talks the best and most effective way to deal a real situation. But not all advises are applicable in a particular situation.

You have mentioned Pluspinc, I visited his site, it is the same as other site that offers a certain kind of Self defense of the use of weapons with a particular fee. In my browsing of the web, the same thing, there are many oraganization offering the best way in pistol, rifle or any type of guns on how to handle it effectively. Some said, point shooting is better then sight shooting. Pluspinc, comments that of all the trainings and stances being currently taught in several schools of defense (martial arts or pistol shooting) are not applicable in real situation.

I think every body want to justify their own way of training and style that it is more effective than the other. Which I believe it is a part of advertising their own organization.

What is the purpose anyway of teaching martial arts and pistol shooting by many clubs or organization if not for profit. So, there is such kinds of discriminating nor saying things that shows that what they have is better than the other. In that way, it is a way of business competition. I read FrontSight and it offers good courses in gun handling as well as it presents all the best instructor attainment. I come into conclusion that everything is all kinds of promotion a particular organization. What I admire are the web sights that gives advises, lessons, courses, articles without any payment. For the interested party can learn from that.

I open the ref. you've made and I found out that I have already seen this one previously in the web also.

I've been reading a lot of martial arts style and I myself is an avid practitioner of several MA's. You have mentioned some best real MA's. Well, I am Filipino but I can say negative things on Escrima or Arnis also, although I have studied it. Why? because I know it's weakpoints also. But I admit, it is a kind of martial arts that is for real.

I can conlude that, any martial arts is effective if the person using it has the qualities to use in many respect. Even how good a particular martial arts if the person using it cannot execute it well or can't use it effectively, still he/she will be considered a lame duck. An opponent can also change the way we apply our style or techniques, as they are moving, thinking and striking also.

You mentioned about the Marines and you are an ex marine of yourself. Isn't it that the Marine Basic Class focus to train beyond Endurance, but being a a real combatant can only be acquire and tested already when you are deployed in the field. Because, on the training, only a lot of Jogging and obstacles to do. And shooting targets also and of course schooling. And those training will be just applied and tested when the trainee is on the field. That even how good the training if the trainee cannot apply in the real world, then training become ineffective.

Thanks in conversing with you Dwight on this forum. I still believe that there is no superior martial arts over another martial arts, but it is good to learn as much as we could if we have the privilige to do.



[This message has been edited by stdalire (edited February 27, 2000).]

pluspinc
February 27, 2000, 06:19 AM
StDilair: If you look at my web page there is a LONG list of FREE lessons. We know many can't get to us so we keep adding to that catagory. Also the photo gallery is FREE and very educational. Our web page is about a $20-$40,000 effort. (thanks goodness my wife is a master web page maker.)
As for Dwights comments he has it 100% right. His comments are pristine.
I have often wondered by women being raped don't take the eyes out of the attacker. We have told females to forget about kicking em where it hurts. That does NOT work. If it did, cops would be trained in its use. When you toss some scumbags eyes into the grass the attack stops. The eyes are easy to remove. Even in the most vicious fights I have seen, and I've seen many, the combatants don't go for the eyes. We must feel some sacred opinion on them or fear it be done to us.
If we really think death or serious injury is a reality, taking the thugs eyes out should be an easy option. If that was done a few times and word got out you could recognize the thugs by the heavy goggles. :-)

stdalire
February 27, 2000, 09:30 AM
pluspinc: Thanks for the comments, actually I have download the photos in your website and I am now trying to study them. The photos are not just ordinary but they depict real stories. Having you showed those pictures seems you have a very easy access to crime laboratories which sometimes control publishing such kinds.

Thanks again and am enjoy discussing to all of you.

Ivanhoe
February 27, 2000, 05:39 PM
pluspinc, its the old "code duello" crap. western society still has the remnant of the "fair fight" doctrine implicitly built into societal mores and law. as if we still believe in the chivalric code, and all conflicts can be solved with jousts and duels.

hypothetical example; some unknown *sshole walks up to me in my garage, says he's going to kick my ass, then begins his assault. the rational response would be to grab a crescent wrench or hammer and rearrange his thought precesses. Bzzt! can't do that, I can only respond with "equal force". the law says a non-LEO can only respond with equal force, and the unwritten rules of societal conduct say that "wouldn't be fair" thus things would get ugly at a jury trial.

any surprise that random crime is still a problem? think about the reaction from the legal system and general society 75 years ago, same hypothetical situation. local LE would fill out a short report, maybe, prosecutors wouldn't even have heard about it, and the local paper would run a short, complementary article. the American legal system only works as designed if there is a certain amount of "street justice". we don't allow that anymore, thus the crime rate.

Skorzeny
February 28, 2000, 09:52 AM
I am getting really tired of this misperception, but a BJJ stylist may or may not go to the ground in a real street encounter.

For NHB competitions and sports Jiu-Jitsu competitions, obviously takedowns and ground techniques are emphasized since these are the areas in which the presumable opponents (strikers) are deficient in.

For street self-defense, however, there is a range of throws and standup submissions in BJJ. One goes to the ground, sometimes, not because one wants to, but because one is FORCED to. Anyone who has been in lots of street fights and claims that he's never been taken down is either lying or an olympic-level wrestler. One can scream all day that one will never be taken down with superior striking or combat or balance skills, but the reality of fights is that many will go to the ground where if one does not know good ground skills, one will be beaten up seriously. Why not worry about not getting killed by one guy before one starts worrying about the second attacker?

It's interesting that people point out a handful of safety precautions in NHB events to deny the usefulness of NHB events as "labs" for testing fighting styles (mainly because their styles don't succeed). True, eye-gouging and fish-hooking are not allowed in any NHB events (some do allow strikes to the groin or neck), but if one suggests that his or her "system" can ONLY be effective IF AND ONLY IF eye-gouging and fish-hooking are allowed, then that system is "hanging on a pretty thin wire" so to speak.

So far, NHB events have been the only venue to simulate reality of a street fight. They are quite realistic (if not quite "real" street fights) and have helped demonstrate the ineffectiveness of many systems and arts. If someone is not satisfied, then show me a viable alternative. Practicing the one-blow death-touch on cooperating static opponents at schools or dojos may impress amateurs, but real professionals know that without dynamic, uncooperative, unpredictable, full-force training, one will never really learn to deal with how people really move in real fights. And, one cannot train dynamically AND RELATIVELY SAFELY at the same time without having a few precautions like no eye-gouging and no fish-hooking.

I have an interesting story to relate, by the way, about eye-gouging. Rickson Gracie, the Gracie family champ, was giving a seminar one time and a supposed "ground fighting" expert showed up to "spar" with Rickson. Now, this "expert" has been claiming that eye-gouging and other "dirty" techniques made ground grappling obsolete. Well, while they were sparring, the guy tried to eye-gouge Rickson a couple of times to get out of a bad position. Rickson, being in superior position through his superior grappling skills, simply slapped the attempts away and then applied a submission which made it impossible for the guy to even tap to submit. The "expert" who showed up to defeat Rickson through "dangerous, barred techniques" had to apologize verbally before Rickson let him go.

Eye-gouging and other "easy-to-learn, effective" techniques are all great and dandy, but in a fast and furious moving fight, it's very difficult to connect such a small target AND if you are in an inferior position on the ground, it is next to impossible to pull them off (actually, you often end up giving the guy in the superior position the idea to use those techniques since it is safer and easier for him).

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

dwightvdb
March 2, 2000, 01:25 AM
Interesting points you bring up, and valid ones. I don't know the weakness of the Filipino martial arts, but I do know that very few warriors use escrima alone, which supports your point.

I disagree (but not vehemently) with your assertion that all martial arts work well for the practioner expert in their application. I don't think that all are equal in effect; at least, not on the street. I would assert, for instance, that Gracie JJ would be uniformly superior to Tae Kwon Do in 95% of normally-encountered street situations. TKD emphasizes high kicks, which is great for sport, and for knocking government mercenaries off their horses (which is what it was designed for). But ... not so good on, say, ice and snow, when the kicker would probably fall on his ass. Often you have to deal with being tackled - the guy just tackles you and takes you to the ground. Of what use is Kung Fu when you're wrestling in the mud and the guy is on top of you? Much better to learn Judo and be able to choke the guy out, than know the Horse Stance and be clueless on the ground in the mud.

Also, it's been documented time and again that in a fight you will act as you've trained. Throw ten thousand punches in the air and stop them two inches in front of your opponent's chest and guess what. That's exactly what you'll do in a fight. I don't train with a partner, because my techniques are all lethal - every one. I have a SparPro dummy that I can gouge and throat chop to my heart's content (in a manner of speaking) and all my practice is full speed, full power. I actually beat the crap out of him, forcing my fingers into his eyes and hitting him as hard as I can in the Adam's apple, over and over and over. Put me in an alley in winter with a TKD black belt and he'd last about five seconds. As he would with you, if you trained like this.

I understand your concern about freedom of information, and the desire to get it all for free. There are plenty of books and videos on the subject, but they cost standard book/video prices. The problem with putting all the information on the web for free is that the bad guys will have equal access to it.

Here's an example. There's a knife stroke, very difficult to defend against, that causes almost certain death. In the old days, only the CQB guys knew about it, but the information got leaked out, and now it's passed by one convict to another word-of-mouth in the prison system. The stroke itself is very simple: you feint to he head, causing your opponent to raise his guard, then cut him where his leg joins his pelvic region. Strangely, this is one of the three most lethal cuts (the others being the neck, and the commando move of driving the long knife down just behind the collarbone and moving it laterally, which cuts the main vessel connected to the heart ... it was this cut, instantly lethal, that the British commando fighting knife was designed to optimally deliver).

The leg cut has an interesting, somewhat surprising, effect. Done correctly (it's quite easy, actually), the femoral artery is severed. Turns out that the blood flow through this channel is quite significant, and you bleed out in a few minutes. You're essentially a dead man walking if someone cuts your femoral artery. The guy cuts you, leaves for a while to talk to his buddies and has a smoke, comes back in a few minutes and you're dead in a huge pool of blood, takes your wallet and your weapon and goes home, mission accomplished.

Much time spent on this scenario in strip-mall studios? Don't think so. You'll be challenged with a thrust to the face and cover with a block and feel a slight pain in your groin, no big deal, and be dead a few minutes later.

What do you do about this attack? Simple. Carry two knives, one on each side, and a gun. Use the knives as weapon-retention devices (he tries to grab your gun from you, you clamp his hand to your side and grab the knife with the free hand and stab him in the arm and belly until he lets go of the gun; then you shoot him). A small gun is not much use, except as a really good knife. I carry a Colt Mustang .380 in my pocket, good enough to put a guy down, and a lot better than my Sig P229 sitting in the safe back home because it's too heavy and klunk to carry all the time. You see the creep coming at you with a knife, you scream "Hey! Stop, You Stop Right There, I don't want to hurt you!!!!" and draw and shoot him twice in the center of his body and once in the head if he keeps coming at you.

Is there a problem? Yes. Turns out that a guy can pull a knife and be right on top of you before you can draw your gun. Knives are more lethal than pistols at close range; strange but true. Try it: put your carry piece in your concealment holster and have a friend stand maybe 10 yards away, and tell him to wait, then run at you and draw his knife and jump you while you're watching. Don't start to draw until you see him start to run at you. The result will shock you: he'll have his knife at your throat before you've got your gun out of the holster. This has been demonstrated time and time again, and is the reason that you're justified (in some states) to shoot a knife-wielding bad guy even before he cuts you. He's actually got the upper hand. You see a knife and an attack, you draw and fire, dude. You'll be lucky to survive.

But I digress. American Combatives is not your average martial arts trip. CQB in general is not the same as other styles. The CQB schools teach you how to kill or severly disable an adversary in a few seconds, just like the Marine Corps taught me in 1966. It's not hard, and it has nothing to do with conditioning, style, or even (surprisingly) strength. The hard part is the mental attitude: you delay all action until the single blow which usually kills your opponent.

Why is strength not important? Because there's no way to build up the front of the eyes, the front of the throat, the testicles, the front of the knees, or the shins. Each of these critical areas is amazingly vulnerable to a strike. Take Arnold Swartzenegger - no matter what he does, his eyes and throat are vulnerable. If a 22-year-old coed knows how to hit him with her full force there, really lay her whole self into a single strike directly into his eyes or Adam's apple, he's toast. That's the principle of CQB, and why it worked for commandos in WWI who were often much slighter and less physical than their German adversaries. You can't strengthen your corneas. They're always going to be extremely vulnerable. Train to strike there, thousands of times the same way, over and over and over, and when the bad guy shows up with his knife and comes at you, you take the cut (you always get cut in a knife fight, get used to it, expect it, don't shy away from being cut) and you take him out by the eyes or throat or nuts.

Little-known fact: a small percentage of men can take a full-force hit in the nuts and carry on just fine. Most of us crumple over and whine and throw up and die a little, but some guys just play on as if nothing had happened (Mohammed Ali was one of these.) This is a "secret", but one I'm not worried about divulging: don't bet your life on a testicle hit. Yes, knee him in the balls if you're close, train for that, but only for softening him up and making him bend over forward to receive your real stroke. But depend on the full-force neck strike to end the fight ... and the man, most likely.

Getting kind of gruesome, so I'll sign off for now.

Take care,
Dwight

dwightvdb
March 2, 2000, 01:49 AM
Skorzeny: the expert who fought Rickson was a fool. BJJ is based on one-on-one combat, but that's never what happens on the street. The bad guy won't attack you unless he has an advantage, and that advantage is either firepower or allies. Usually allies. The actual encounter on the street would have been Rickson and the "expert", and the expert's friend(s) waiting in the shadows, or just down the block. As Rickson was asking for the apology, the ally would have stabbed him in the back.

It's never one-on-one. Walk down a city street at midnight and see how many solo, threatening dudes you see. Almost zero, right? Where is that in the BJJ system, or any other system, for that matter? Aikido trains in defense against multiple attackers, but they're all unarmed. Hello?

You've got to be able to take someone out immediately, end of story. Could I take out Rickson? No chance. If he's ready and waiting for me in his gi, and it's a match and there we are in the ring unarmed, he's going to clean my clock every time. But on the street, I'll be armed. He comes at me, I draw and fire, if I have time. If not, he wins. If he's the good guy and I'm the bad guy, then I have two or three friends walking with me, and when I see him I talk trash and them jump him. He's trained to grapple, so he'll grapple me to the ground, at which time my friends end the fight in my favor. No amount of grappling skill can overcome that.

If you go to the ground, no matter how skilled you are, you're a dead man. That's the rule in the military, and I think it's the rule on the street. I had a near encounter at a bus stop this evening. Was it me and him? Come on. It was me and him and his three friends in the car. Do you really think that Rickson would have stood a much better chance? I'd lay serious money that at least two of the friends were packing serious calibres. BJJ is a joke.

But that's just one man's opinion. I'm looking forward to your well-considered response.

Take care,
Dwight

stdalire
March 2, 2000, 05:20 AM
Dwight, it is a very realistic response from you. I have gone all over your posts, read and analyze it. I would like to say, you hit the point very well.

I agree with you of the effectiveness of a knife in a close range. I have posted some of my real experiences on using knife as basic defense in other pluspinc thread, and after reading your posts, you're the only man I have got affirmation or heard from commenting on the effectiveness of a knife in close range encounter against a revolver or pistol. For the discussion only, many cops in Philippines also that were stabed before they were able to fire their revolvers on the BG.

Yes, you're right that front of the throat, testicles and knee caps cannot be strengtened or hardended and these portions of the body is vulnerable and deadly to attack if we could hit them easily.

I have said that there is also weakness of Filipino Stick Fighting or Escrima, because learning on the movements and techniques of it especially the one "modern arnis" which is very much comercialized now, I see its big difference being practiced by our old folks in the province.

When I see a demonstration of the old people in remote areas, they strike with lightning speed and has no so much styles of being so sporty, that is why many Filipinos dislikes to learn real Arnis or Stick fighting because it is not that easy if is the real Stick fighting. The "Old Maestro" will really hit your hands when he is teaching, but now the modern arnis has many flaws as I have seen from those who have studied it (not from Presas brothers but from the students). To be honest, Modern Arnis is even more popularized in US Circle than in the Philippines. My understanding of the Sticks is just an extension of the hands, and once you have grabbed the stick wielder and get very closed to him and did not able to hit you on distant, the arnis will be inapplicable already. This is not to demean the Arnis player for I am arnis player of myself also and a former student of Ernesto Presas, but I am showing only the weakness and that is one way of re-thinking or reflect on what really we should pick up from the different school of martial arts to use in real defense. To have a stick is good to use if the opponent guy has a knife or bolo to hit you, then using the arnis (stick) as an extension is very much reliable to us, instead of parying with the barehand. Also, Arnis should not be taken as a good weapon for blocking, but use to extend your hands to hit the wrist or arms that holds the knife or sticks and the feet. It is a good extension to strikes any parts of the body, that you can hardly reach with your hands. Of course it is easier to hit a points if your hands has an extension. But if the arnis can be substituted with a bladed weapon (Bolo, Kampilan, or any form of long bladed weapon) then I could say it is really dangerous and I doubt if there is a barehand martial arts that could defend it. But if just a stick against another martial arts expert, it is not that much deadly.

Dwight, I understand that, giving so much easy access to free information would impair the easy transfer of techniques to BG's. But again, how can we differentiate and distinguish a BG and not.

On your honest opinion and perception, I would say that there are many BG's looking good guys hiding on their expensive coat and tie suit, good amount of money, and positions in the government. Well that is another topic but just an illustration on my part. The only BG usually pinpointed by many are those that intend to hurt one physical body (mostly from gangs on the street) or those having intention to get ones life driven by their petty crimes activities. But for me there are more big time BG's only they are more professional and refined and these are more dangerous if they will work with some people for money.

Thanks Dwight for the conversation. I've got good info from your comments.

Sonny

Skorzeny
March 2, 2000, 09:55 AM
Dwight:

From your post ("BJJ is a joke" ad naseum), it is clear to me that you don't really understand the purpose of any kind of unarmed self-defense.

Rickson would still kill you in the streets, because he would have 100 friends with him and many will be armed as well (ever see Rickson fighting Hugo Duarte at a beach in Rio in swimming trunks - he had lots of friends to make sure he wasn't going to be fighting more than one person).

Even though I am a grappler and hold very high regard for BJJ techniques, if I were attacked on the street, I would first try to run away and then if that were impossible, then try to use a knife or an improvised weapon (stick, baseball bat, bottle, keys etc. whatever is handy). I will use BJJ and other unarmed systems I train in IF I am unable to escape, unable to use or reach a weapon and particularly if some big guy tries to take me down (thinking that he can control and hurt me on the ground).

For that role of "last ditch" unarmed defense, I think that BJJ is without equal in that it truly allows a physically weaker person to overcome a strong fighter (especially a strong striker).

This is also especially good for women who may be in danger of being raped. When men attack women, they don't square off ("puts your hands up, lady, and let's fight") or allow the women to arm themselves first ("are you ready?") and then fight. Men, 9 times out of 10, suddenly tackle the women down, control them, and then rape them. BJJ is excellent for women in such cases.

This is completely anecdotal, but there was a brief article on the American Riflemen (on American Guardian as well) about a homeowner who went out of his bed, armed with a handgun, to investigate the "strange noise" (I understand house clearing should really be left to the police). He was tackled by the home intruder, the gun was dropped in the ensuing struggle and the homeowner had to fight the guy on the ground for several minutes before he was finally able to overpower the guy (with a choke) and then retrieve the gun. Now there is one person who could have benefitted from BJJ (or another similar grappling art). Now imagine if this were a small man or a woman (or the attacker was much stronger). The outcome would have been very different.

Clearly, it is a fool who shows up (regardless of skill) unarmed to a knife fight as it is a fool who shows up to a gun fight with a knife. BJJ is never claimed to be effective against an armed person or multiple attackers (which is very honest compared to virtually every other system out there). But it is claimed (with some justification) to be the most useful and effective means of defending oneself when all the other options have run out.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

Byron Quick
March 2, 2000, 10:39 AM
Skorzeny, I have nothing but respect for BJJ as I have mentioned before. I heartily agree that for one on one unarmed it is the best around. For me though, I have absolutely no faith in being able to arrange the one on one unarmed scenario with an opponent in a street fight.

Your signature line is the key for me. I have studied Sun Tzu's Art of War for twenty years now. Give us two opponents, one who is sixty years old, arthritic, weak, and a lifelong student of Sun Tzu. Another who is a world champion in NHB and a multiple black belt holder. I know who I'll bet on. I humiliated a TKD black belt once simply using terrain 'cuz he couldn't turn into an eggbeater in the sapling grove I retreated into. Some guy is the reincarnation of Elmer Keith with a pistol? Time to dust off the long range rifle. Victory in combat is defined as obtaining your objective. Your objective is to beat my butt. Mine is to possess an unbeaten butt. My parameters for victory are met by simply not being there.

There are unvoiced assumptions in much of the preceding dialogue. One is a duel mentality, i.e, I'm going to face him man to man and destroy him by virtue of my superior martial skills. Bull puckey! I'm more interested in
martial ways that will allow me to attain victory even though I am weaker, outnumbered, sick, and simply not as good at martial arts techniques as my opponent. Sun Tzu points the way to fulfill this goal. That is the beef I have with NHB type contests. Not that I can't eye gouge, nut bite, etc. But that the format does not allow the use of strategy. The last thing I'm looking for in a fight is a level playing field. It's going to be as unfair a fight as I can make it.

In other words, if the baddest guy who ever lived mastered the ultimate fighting art for one on one unarmed, and drools at the thought of pounding on me...my response will be to get a couple of buddies with our handguns and tell him,"hey, dude, let's get it on!"

I've been in about thirty fights and serious confrontations. I'm 27-3. In two of the three losses I was on the ground, concussed and semi-conscious before I knew I was in a fight. In the other loss I was fighting a guy when an onlooker gave me a haymaker from behind and then attacked my original opponent-me? I was on the ground semi-conscious and concussed...again. I pay a serious amount of attention to my six today. Four of the 27 wins were against mulitple opponents. 3 were with four and 1 was with eight. One of the four opponents episodes was suddenly stopped when I picked up an entrenchment tool and smiled as I asked,"Who dies first?" The possible consequences of the fight had escalated beyond the scope of their intention. They didn't want to fight as badly as they thought they did. The eight was a special case-they were unarmed and I had a big stick and darkness. Defense via pre-emptive strike. I not only won...I was not touched. The other two four on one cases did not use any special martial art techniques. I simply grabbed the most enthusiastic attacker with left hand while applying haymaker strikes with my right fist. (The haymaker is a very effective strike if you have a grip on your opponent or if striking from behind against an unknowing opponent.) After about two strikes, the guy was easy to jerk around so I used him as a shield to thwart the efforts of his buddies. After about four or five strikes I let go of him and grabbed the next most enthusiastic and continued the drill. In both cases, when I released victim #2, the third and fourth opponents decided to quit the field. Multiple attackers are really not very dangerous unless they have trained in group attacks together. Luckily, none of the groups I have faced had done so.

I never forget that my true opponent is the mind, spirit, will, heart, (call it what you will) of my opponent. I have had people decide that maybe they didn't want to fight after all simply because I was calmly agreeable to fighting. No trying to leave, trying to reason, trying to weasel out, just a quiet "Let's do it." Especially when you do it against a group, calm acceptance worries them.

------------------
Byron Quick

Skorzeny
March 2, 2000, 11:15 AM
Dwight:

A few more points...

1. TKD was not designed to "knock off goverment mercenaries on horseback." TKD evolved from Japanese Shotokan Karate. General Choi, the founder of TKD, was a student of Gichin Funakoshi (the founder of Shotokan) in Japan. When Choi returned to Korea, he evolved TKD to make a greater use of kicks because he wanted to distinguish TKD from Shotokan and to take advantage of the fact that Koreans were taller and longer-legged than the Japanese. So, in terms of age, TKD is not really a traditional art (neither is Shotokan, various Jujutus, Aikido and Judo - they are all relatively recent developments).

2. I agree with you that, even in practice, stopping the punch two inches from the target is very bad when it is applied in practice. But, your method of practicing against a dummy is highly ineffective as well, because you really need to train dynamically (with an opponent who moves unpredictably) to be effective. Boxers are some of the best strikers because they train dynamically (full-force sparring). It is really better to train dynamically (full-force and movement) with limited techniques (like boxing) than to practice lots of death-touch one-shot one-kill strikes to a dummy or a cooperative, static opponent.

3. "never one-on-one" in real life
I was in dozens and perhaps hundreds of fights when I was much younger. I'd say about 90% of the time, the fights were one-on-one (most of those fight went to the ground). Now I understand that things are very different with criminal attacks, but my point here is that criminal attacks are not the only kind of street encounters (I understand that legally, all attacks are criminal, more or less). People get into fights for all kinds of reasons, not just to rob or rape. So, while it is very possible to get into fights with more than one person, it is not impossible or unusual to fight with a single belligerent person (could be a criminal, a rowdy bar customer, an intruder, a neighbor, etc. etc.).

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

dwightvdb
March 4, 2000, 01:46 PM
To each his own.

I'm 51 and lazy and I don't like to fight, not even a little bit. I've spent a great deal of my life attempting to learn how to be a good husband and father, a good listener and lover and understander and nurturer of women and children. I cry at movies that aren't even all that sad. I play soft songs on my guitar and develop images from my black-and-white film in my modest darkroom and spend far too much time studying eastern philosophy and religion. I've spent two ten-day stretches meditating constantly at vipassana retreats, have sat zazen at Zen centers across the country, have learned sacred Hawaiian bodywork in Kauai. The list goes on.

I wish only to protect the life and limb of myself and other weak, good people who are under assault by strong, hostile people. I would rather spend my remaining hours on the planet in the joy of deep conversation and intimate relationship with a woman filled with love than doing pushups and hitting heavy bags at the dojo. The laughter of my granddaughter means more to me than the grunt of my opponent hitting the floor.

I reserve one evening a week with my son Ben for "Junto", which has exactly one rule: each of us must create something original, from scratch, and present it to the other. Often it's a four or five page writing; sometimes a poem, sometimes a photograph, sometimes a song. The minimum acceptable offering is a haiku, a short poem in the Japanese style that has three lines, seventeen syllables, with an indirect reference to the seasons.

I could spend that time in my gi, doing shoulder rolls and sweeps and strikes.

But I don't. I've found that it helps me get clear on priorities if I ask myself this question: when I'm 77 and on my deathbed, only a few days left, and am thinking back over my life, and I sigh, what will I be thinking? From most reports of those those who work with the dying, the usual statement of men at the very end of their lives goes something like this: "I had a good career, raised a good family, but ..... Looking back on it all, I really wish that I had spent more time doing X."

What will X be, for you?

For me, this is certain: X will not be "pushups" or "throwing opponents to the ground" or "hitting heavy bags." X, for me, has to do with relationships. Time with my sons, important time where we share with each other our hopes and dreams and truth. Time with my wife, swimming in her love, giving her the sea of my love, no agenda, nothing about her that I want to change. Time with my grandkids, sparkling and full of energy and hope, not yet disillusioned about what can and cannot be accomplished.

That's why CQB works for me, and not BJJ or TKD or Arnis or JKD. I am not a fighter, not a competitor, and I don't like to hit people. Hurting someone else, dominating him, gives me no joy. I avoid it at all costs.

With one exception. If he should physically attack me or one close to me with lethal force, I will put him down.

Dwight

Gwinnydapooh
March 6, 2000, 12:43 AM
Man, have I learned a ton from this thread. A few points summarized:

1. Don't even bring a gun to a gun fight. If there's going to be a fight, don't friggin' show up!!

2. I will not call Spartacus insane, but I WILL leave the fighting of multiple opponents to him since he finds them so un-dangerous--me, no thanks. :)

3. Art seems to matter little. Everyone has given good reasons why their art works as well as all the others, IF they have the givens:
a. enough practice!
b. conditioning!
c. intelligent strategy! (range, terrain, etc.)

4. Nothing works well against multiple opponents except being a badass in the first place.

5. Nothing beats everything. Like someone said way back, combat is apparently a lot like rock-paper-scissors.

Skorzeny
March 6, 2000, 10:21 AM
Oh, Dwight:

That was just beautiful. You could have saved your breath and said "I am not a fighter, I am a lover" instead of launching into a lecture about how polished a human being you are.

Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but I sense a little bit of condescension in your message.

One minute we are discussing best techniques for self-defense and the next minute you are talking about what a humane lover you are, but how you are going to "put down" anyone who gets in your face!

Just because I like to spend some of my time learning BJJ, Shooto and Muay Thai does not make me any less sophisticated, humane or creative than someone who does not. I am Ivy League-educated and hold advanced degrees in international relations and economics. My wife, who by the way, also trains in grappling, is a medical student and will soon be a healer of people.

Perhaps we should save the poetry and "I-am-a-better-human-being-than-you-because-I -don't-fight" routine for another site since this is "AF/CQC: Alternative Force/Close Quarters COMBAT" (emphasis mine) site.

Skorzeny

------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu

pluspinc
March 7, 2000, 02:39 PM
I have been fascinated by this thread. It is shocking the difference of attitude here from the gun types. Here the attitude is one of realistic expectations. The first is to avoid the problem, the second is to be realistic about the ability of any training to work, and the distinct potential for loss or failure, thus back to avoiding the problem etc. Shooters think they hold magic powers and will perform like superman and use every ounce of anything they ever learned and prevail. Wish the real world worked like that. This thread is far more realistic and logical. Pat yourselves on the back please.

stdalire
March 7, 2000, 11:58 PM
Thank you very much to all of you for the very well taken comments and opinions from defense instructors as well as practicioner.

You have shown, when to employ a surgical strikes to a BG when necessary and when to reflect the oneself to accepts the reality of a fight in self defense situation.

Love, harmony, force and anger are elements that envelope a man's personality.

In my reading of many topics especially in self defense, mostly just think that arming oneself with the best kind of guns and bullets are just the main factors in escaping death from BG's or criminals.

Like what pluspinc said "The first is to avoid the problem, the second is to be realistic about the ability of any training to work, and the distinct potential for loss or failure, thus back to avoiding the problem etc. Shooters think they hold magic powers and will perform like superman and use every ounce of anything they ever learned and prevail".

+P has a good and realistic points to reflect from his statements.

Giving a good analysis to what +p have said, to my own understanding only, many gun owners or shooters disregard the reality in a gun encounter or in a real fight using pistol or any form of barehand/weapon martial arts.

One thing I have realized. The more I have studied martial arts, the more I feel I get away from trouble. Why? I am afraid that if I used what I have studied to a normal trouble or to the extent to defend myself being hit or scratch against a punks, or for my self defense. Still, I will face alot of trouble after a fight. Firstly, the legal problems aside of the aftermath vengeance of the other party. I hate and 'don't like of being charge or even step upon the door of a jail. Thus, if I get into trouble even on the protection of my honor, family or my life, I always see to it that I am on the favor side if it comes to legality.

Proving oneself innocense is the hardest thing to do in court, even you're innocent if the other party is more moneyed, influential, or person in authority - it will take time and money to prove your guiltless.

Some said, it is better to be alive rather then being a victim. Yes, it is true, that is every one motto or principle. But the point is, whatever encounter we are in self defense, always and always there must be good explanation why we employ such deadly force to an opponent. Even the guy whom we strike suffers the lightest injury, we are still subject to trouble or legal problems.

So now, here comes the ideas of many who have posted in many threads who said, that they don't like to be in a fight, that if possible they will get away from it always. But again, even how good man we are, there is always unexpected moments where we become victims of harrasment, holdup, framed up and many evil works in a society and it causes us to act irrational human being.

So, if we talk self defense of ourselves, we are not only talking the self defense of our physical body, but self defense or protecting your personality of not being tag as trouble maker, protecting your small savings to be drained by just being into a fight (for self defense purpose), to save a family of being away from them if you are jailed because the legal systems was blind to see the truth that you acted in self defense.

In conclusion, self defense incorporates many elements that we defend in our life not only to defend our physical body but all things that is related to our vey existence. Thus, employing the deadly defense knowhow we have is only a last resort to do.

Thank you for the time in presenting my own ideas.

[This message has been edited by stdalire (edited March 08, 2000).]

.
March 20, 2000, 06:22 PM
Closed due to length, start part-II.