The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 21, 1999, 03:38 PM   #51
allanh
Member
 
Join Date: August 31, 1999
Posts: 25
I have to ask a question here. I do not mean to offend anyone, but you all keep talking about fights against multiple attackers. I'm 36 and lived a fairly rough life, I have only ever been in one fight against multiple attackers. You all are traing for a circumstance that if it is a real threat in your life, maybe you should change your life style. I recently started training in Hapkido, and feel that in 99% of most situations I was ever in, it would have worked well. If some one knows more than you, it does not matter the art or the style, you are going to be hurting when it's all over.

Again no offense is meant by this.
allanh is offline  
Old September 25, 1999, 12:57 PM   #52
Spectre
Staff Alumnus
 
Join Date: October 23, 1998
Location: DC
Posts: 3,274
I have stated for years that I would prefer to bring their head to my foot than vise-versa. I think most high kicks should not be attempted. I also think that kicking range is a lot closer than many believe. I think folks who kick in fights often take a beating. That said, there can be a place for it, and I know several folks who could use their feet on your face with impunity- but I do not think they would open a fight in this manner.

Though I thought it kinda off-topic, I distrust hyperbole. There really are better arts, but there is no substitute for dirt time and hard work. (Read this suchly: SCARS and SAFTA will never get my money.) I have seen the critiques of several bugeisha I respect regarding SCARS. They found it laughable- not useless, perhaps, but there were no "secrets". From what was said, it was information that any decent ninpo taijutsu practitioner knows- basic. FWIW, it's ridiculous to expect everyone to react identically to stimuli. I know people who would give no immediate reaction to breakage of most of the smaller bones

I train, among other reasons, to handle difficult and dangerous situations. It only makes sense to train to handle really bad situations. Keeping one's feet seems like common sense; how else can I run? It seems to make sense to know how to use the ground, but foolish to prefer it. In self-defense, distance is our friend. Keep as much of it as possible between you and the threat.

Spartacus is a good friend, and not, perhaps, intrinsically dangerous to associate with.

[This message has been edited by Spectre (edited September 25, 1999).]
Spectre is offline  
Old September 28, 1999, 08:54 AM   #53
Chuck Ames
Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 1999
Posts: 84
Well,

There are obviously some strong opinions out there, so I'll just add my two cents worth.

Not that I'm the most experienced guy around, but I think we often forget that a fight is a dirty nasty affair with biting, gouging, knees, and elbows. People often tout the supreriority of their "system", but in the end all we end up with is hype.

2nd Ranger Battalion at Fort Lewis, WA contracted Royce Gracie and his brother in 1996 to do a two week hand to hand course. Why? Because it's the best fighting system or because somebody was watching the UFC? For months after that, we saw the Rangers always practising the "mount" and other ground fighting techniques. Think about it. If someone in a CQB environment is on the ground something has gone horribly wrong, and while it may be necessary to train for that, you hopefully have backup during a 4-man room entry. Because the Gracie's won the UFC everybody focuses on ground fighting. One of the other contributors mentioned that BJJ has hand to hand techniques to use before taking someone down, but if I can beat you there, the rest doesn't matter. My opinion is that whatever system is used, it should be hard, fast, and violent, easily learned and easily remembered. My criticism of the universal acceptance of the UFC as the "fighting lab" is that all the best moves are rightly forbidden. By that I mean Eyes, throat, knees, etc. As private citizens our right to self defense ends when the subject is disabled. In other words, if I apply a wonderful choke hold, and in the altercation crush his windpipe or otherwise permanently injure or kill him, I'm open to a lawsuit at best and manslaughter charges at worst. Why, because by the time I got the choke hold on, he is probably subdued.

I understand that a throat strike is potentially lethal, but if it is employed during the fight, not at the end of the fight, it is more justifiable. Hopefully, if any of us is fighting it's because we fear death or serious bodily injury, and not because:
a. Someone offended us
or
b. we've got something to prove.
There is no telling what the body is capable of. On the one hand it can take an enormous amount of punishment, and on the other, it's terribly fragile. So if you decide to mix it up, it damn well better be worth it, and that means anything goes.

Simple, direct, and violent.
With power comes responsibility.

Chuck
Chuck Ames is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06543 seconds with 9 queries