GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-12-2005, 18:29   #1
gr81disp
Bushbot v1.0
 
gr81disp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,613
Send a message via AIM to gr81disp
Bullshido.com's Ground Grappling FAQ

I took this from the Techniques and Tactics forum of www.bullshido.com.

I felt the need to post this here after a comment from another poster on a thread here.



FAQ:

All right, we've all suffered through countless HRRMMM DUZ BEE JAY JAY WORK VS MULTIPLE PUERTO RICAN GANGSTAZ IN AN ELEVATOR? BECAUSE WHAT IF THEY STOMPED YOU OR BIT YOUR EYEBALLS and "IS SPORT GRAPPLING REALLY APPLICABLE TO THE REALITY OF THE STREET/A BIKER BAR/WRESTLIN A GATOR IN A LOUISIANA SWAMP AT NIGHT, WITH INEXPLICABLE ZYDECO MUSIC IN THE BACKGROUND/BEING ADRIFT IN AN ALTERTNATE UNIVERSE BEYOND TIME?".

Well it's time to put it all to rest. Here, in this FAQ, we lay out the final word on all such subjects. Now we will have this weapon to call upon in our darkest need, when faced with hordes of fags on shaolin wolf or wherehaveyou. It will be the internet equivalent of a summon shiva spell.

Points for the commitee to consider:

-Why anti grappling is a moronic idea.

-Multiple opponents: Why striking is no safer than grappling.

-Weapons: Why you HAVE to grapple to disarm your opponent

-Knee vs a takedown: Why it is very low percentage

-the difference between grappling and groundfighting

-Qin Na does not contain every technique in BJJ or Judo

-"Why don't you roll on concrete instead of a mat?" (yes, this has actually come up)

-Concrete examples (videos), with links

And any other suggestions.

Introduction to this FAQ:
The neccesity of learning to grapple and fight on the ground has been debated countless times on internet martial arts forums such as bullshido.net. Arguements have breen brought forth and systematically taken apart over and over again. Evidence has been shown for the neccesity of learning to fight on the ground if one wishes to be a well rounded fighter, prepared for all situations.
This FAQ was created for the purpose of disspelling common misconceptions about what grappling and groundfighting are and are not.

____________________ _____
Q: Doesn't the presence of broken glass, needles, lava, sharks, etc. on the ground make groundfighting a bad idea even if you're good at it?

A: Striking advocates are quick to point out that you would never want to roll around on the ground where you would get scraped up by the asphalt or broken glass. This is indeed the truth and it is why a person should train in groundfighting.

A groundfighter is going to control the takedown and be on TOP thus using the harsh environment against his attacker. Even if our groundfighter is in a disadvantageous position, he will quickly improve position, whereas the helpless striker would just flail about and remove the skin from his own back.

B: A fight is an unpredictable event and going to the ground is a possibility. You may not have the luxery of keeping the fight standing especially if you do not train in proper takedown defenses. You may also trip, or slip on something, or...the list goes on and on.

Learning groundfighting will give you the ability to continue to defend yourself as well as teach you proper, safe ways to stand back up.
____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________


Q: But couldn't I just gouge the grappler's eyes, or bite him?

The non-grappler will claim to resort to such infallible techniques as eyegouging, biting and / or genital crushing techniques. The reasons why this is bullshido are as follows:

1. How often do these strikers actually train these movements? The answer is usually not very often. Thus, they are a somewhat risky method of countering a grappler, who has practiced the movements they will be using many times before on resisting opponents.

2. Eyegouging, biting and genital mandhandling are of course very uncomfortable for those on the recieving end, but they are not instant fight-enders. Resorting to these techniques suggests a 'last chance' situation, whereby the grappler has you under their control and you are trying a last ditch attempt to escape or injure the grappler. If you do not either gouge the eye right out of the socket and put your thumb in their brain, crush their nuts even through various layers of clothing, or bite a rather large chunk from their body, they will continue to choke you to unconsciousness or break / disable a joint or limb.

3. What you can do to them, they can do to you. In other words. if a grappler can beat you under a specific ruleset, chances are that when those rules are lifted, they can beat you even worse. There is no unwritten law in life that states only kung fu weenies can poke someone in the eye or squeeze some testicles.

Which brings us to the last point,

4. Whatever move you claim to be able to pull out of the bag during 'anti-grappling', chances are a grappler can not only do the same move to you, but can use their skill and experience of fighting in that range to put themselves in a much better position than you to apply the move, and also have the knowledge and experience to defend against it far better than a non-grappler.
For instance, from under mount, trying to gouge your opponent's eyes will give your opponent a great opportunity to armbar you. Whereas the person on top mount can gouge with impunity.

5: So far these tactics have never worked on a skilled grappler. For instance, in the john marsh vs. kung fu guy video on bullshido.net, the kung fu guy trys to gouge Marsh's eyes from underneath side control. Marsh uses the raised arm as an opportunity to apply a keylock and snaps the kung fu guy's shoulder.

____________________ ____________________ __________

Q: But don't grapplers have to reach me first?

A: Yes they do. However, the deceptive, quick, and expolosive nature of the shot (takedown) makes this relatively easy allowing you only one solid attack with which you must KO your opponent to avoid grappling. Should you fail, you'll likely end up on the ground or at least entangled witn your opponent.

____________________ ____________________ __________

Q: Submissions are just for sport. In real life no one taps out so how can you use grappling in a fight?

A: Submissions are generally not pain based. Many submissions will seriously injure, cripple, or even kill the opponent if actually finished. Chokes and strangles will render them first unconscious and then dead. This is the reason why people tap out.

____________________ _____________

Q: Couldn't I just hit sidestep the shot?

A: Theorists believe that the shoot is executed from a great distance like a football tackle. This is why most believe that a simple side step, palm strike to the ear, or knee to the face will take down any grappler trying to shoot because they can see it coming. Effective shoots are used from close range and are typically set up via punch combinations or by causing the opponent to break their balance prior to shooting.

____________________ _____________


Q: Why don't you roll on concrete instead of a mat?

A: For safety reasons. The mat protects the person who is being taken down (IE the person who's been outwrestled). It is NOT because grappling is innefective on concrete. Quite the opposite, in fact.

____________________ ____________________ ___________________

Q: Where can I see concrete evidence of the unworkability of "anti-grappling" techniques and the neccesity of learning grappling and groundfighting?

A: On the internet, the download sections of Bullshido.net and Subfighter.net have many clips of grappler vs. striker fights.

The Ultimate Fighting championships one through five brought fighters from many different styles, grappling and striking, together in no rules matches. Vale Tudo matches continue in Brazil and sometimes in the USA and Japan.

The gracie jiujitsu in action videotapes show the famous gracie brothers fighting challenge matches against many other styles.
__________________

Q: What about multiple opponents?

A: There is no evidence that striking is any safer than grappling when fighting multiple opponents. Fighting several attackers is a losing proposition for anyone, grappler or striker. It's not impossible but it is very unlikely. People who think they can fight multiple people without getting seriously hurt tend to have watched a few too many kung fu movies.

The best defense in this situation is to run away.

B: The second best defense is to have a weapon (or three).

Grappling and ground-fighting skills are essential in a
multiple opponent scenario with weapons involved. Put
simply put you need grappling/groundfighting skills to
utilize a weapon effectively when escape is not an option.

A weapon is not a magic wand. It often requires time or
multiple successful attacks to remove an attacker from the
fight. In the meantime dog-pack tactics are likely to be
employed against you. A multiple opponent scenario where
escape and evasion is not possible is by definition “close quarters”.
To escape from a clinch, takedown, tackle, or pin requires
personal understanding of how it is executed. It may take
minutes for an attacker who has been stabbed to cease all
resistance, and a bludgeoned opponent may collapse on you or
pass out with a death grip on parts of your anatomy.

No part of a multiple opponent scenario is pleasant to
contemplate.. but whether you can run or must fight, the
grappling and groundfighting skill-sets are essential if you
want to live through a bad situation. Hopefully you won’t have
to use them, but they are critical insurance when things go
pear-shaped.

____________________ _

Q:"I wouldn't want to grapple/wrestle with a bigger opponent, I'd rather strike."

A: In the striking range, there is a higher percentage of chance factors that can result in the inferior striker getting in a shot that KO's the other person. This is especially true if you are fighting a big person. A bigger person with little or no training can still throw powerful punches. A good grappler can negate this by taking the bigger person to the ground and minimizing the distance the bigger opponent has to build momentum in striking. Yes, size still matters on the ground, but not as much as standing up. It's more likely that your technical skills on the ground will protect you against a larger opponent than standing up.

____________________ _

Question: Grappling styles such as folkstyle, freestyle and Greco roman wrestling are just sports. How is knowing one of those styles going to help in a real fight?
----------------------------------------------
Answer: Yes, the various wrestling styles are sports but consider these following points.

1. Wrestlers perform their techniques between 80% to 100% full speed during every training session. That means that they have drilled their techniques countless thousands of times under real conditions against opponents who are actively training and defending at the same speed they are. These techniques are ingrained into their muscle memory, as are all the possible variations that can arise when changes are introduced.

2. Wrestling practice and competition is always full contact. Wrestlers are used to working in a full contact environment where pain is part of the game. This means they are used to getting slammed, bumped, bruised, twisted and cross-faced etc. Wrestlers have developed the mental and physical toughness required to compete in a very physically demanding sport and this translates well to a real fighting situation.

3. Active participants in any style of wrestling are going to be in phenomenal shape. Wrestlers generally spend a decent portion of their training session getting into shape with a combination of calisthenics (pushups, pull-ups, sit-ups and dips), weights and aerobic/anaerobic exercises (long distance running, wind sprints and bleachers/stairs). In addition to these they spend a lot of time performing anaerobic activities in of all things… wrestling. This translates to roughly 2-3 hours a day at least 4-5 days a week of non-stop physical fitness.

__________________


continued...
__________________
"We will not cheat steal or lie, nor tolerate any among us who do."

If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory.
gr81disp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 18:30   #2
gr81disp
Bushbot v1.0
 
gr81disp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,613
Send a message via AIM to gr81disp
CONTINUED...

Question: But doesn't my traditional system already have groundfighting?

Answer: Many traditional systems do have an assortment of techniques which are said to counter basic attacks of groundfighting. However, before even discussing if these techniques work, one must first look at how these techniques are trained. Many of these techniques never get trained in an alive manner, so the student will not know how to apply them in an actual grappling situation. Conversely, the student training in aliveness will have practiced their techniques much more often, and against opponents who have also practiced countering them. In comparison, the student training groundfighting techniques without practice is no better equipped than someone with no "training."

Also, because these techniques never get practiced in an alive manner, counters to things like takedowns and pins can get considerably more surreal and less based in effectiveness, simply because the instructor or student may not understand grappling. Grappling doesn't always follow normal human instinct, and improper training could result in bad techniques that make it even easier for the poorly trained student to be beaten by an experienced grappler. Examples of this include counters to takedowns that involve lifting one of you legs up, which just makes it easier for you to be taken down, or attempting to eye-gouge while mounted which simply opens you up to a number of armbars.

Finally, remember that all systems have different focuses, and therefore different strengths and weaknesses. Just because your Shotokan class has some "grappling" in the syllabus doesn't mean that you're going to get a complete understanding of grappling from them. BJJ classes will briefly touch on some aspects of striking, but that doesn't mean you'll be a competent striker. To understand different ranges of combat, you actually have to train in them, fully, and from someone with a proper understanding of them. BJJ striking isn't going to teach in depth strategies of footwork, defense, and striking power that a good stand-up class wil. The same strategy and understanding of grappling needs to be built by actually training grappling, otherwise you will have no idea what you're doing in this essential range of combat.


____________________ ____-


Q: But in my school/system/class/warrior clan, we train so that we are never taken down. Why should we learn grappling?
A: Professional Boxers train to never get knocked out, but it still happens. Players of almost ANY sport train to not let their opponent win, but it still happens. There are no gaurantees in fighting, and as much time as you spend training to never be taken down, there are people training to take you down. It's important to know how to adapt to all situations, good and bad, and that includes grappling.

Also, there is ample evidence, video and otherwise, of people claiming they cannot be taken down, only to be taken down and submitted minutes later.

____________________ _____

Q: What about anti-grappling?

A: In addition to the refutations above, the whole idea of "Anti-grappling" is absurd. If I were to claim to be practicing "anti-striking" every time I shot a double leg takedown, you'd laugh, wouldn't you? "Anti-grappling" is just as ridiculous an idea.

An entire range of fighting cannot be dismissed with just a few techniques.

____________

Q: I saw some MMA matches where guys were knocked out. Doesn't this mean grappling doesn't work?

A: Crosstraining in both grappling and striking is neccesary to be succesful in MMA. However, if you don't grapple at all, your chances of success are slim to none. Even fighters who prefer to strike have to train grappling.

_______________

Q: Ok, you convinced me. But it looks scary. I don't wanna get my arm broken by a three hundred pound ex-wrestler!

A: It isn't. The tap-out system allows for a maximum of safety, much more than sparring in striking arts.

________________

Q: It looks gay...

A: What are you, eight?
__________________
"We will not cheat steal or lie, nor tolerate any among us who do."

If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory.
gr81disp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 18:42   #3
Deputydave
Senior Member
 
Deputydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,771
There are some valid points in the above offering, however there is a lot of 'bull****o' in it as well.

Lets see, an eye-gouge is 'uncomfortable'? ;Q

A striker can't operate effectively on the ground? ;Q I suppose if the 'striker' only trained in sports specific applications this would be true. Anyone that has trained with Tony Lambria, Tony Blauer or Ken Good might readily disagree with such a statement.

Grappling can be useful, at least I find it useful. But the applications need to be SD and not sport. If someone wants to learn sport grappling and try to apply it to a street encounter where multiple attackers and/or weapons may be present....well it's your funeral ;f
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Deputydave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 18:55   #4
gr81disp
Bushbot v1.0
 
gr81disp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,613
Send a message via AIM to gr81disp
OK, I'll make you a deal, you try to eyegouge me on the ground and see how quick you get your arm broken. Try watching the UFC to see how a striker does on the ground and before you say anything about it being a "sport" it is the closest you can get to a streetfight without picking fights at a bar. The fact it is trying to make is that one MUST know how to grapple to survive. You keep missing that point and pointing out it is useful tool as opposed to a NECESSARY one.
__________________
"We will not cheat steal or lie, nor tolerate any among us who do."

If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory.
gr81disp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 18:59   #5
Deputydave
Senior Member
 
Deputydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
A groundfighter is going to control the takedown and be on TOP thus using the harsh environment against his attacker. Even if our groundfighter is in a disadvantageous position, he will quickly improve position, whereas the helpless striker would just flail about and remove the skin from his own back.
Really? A 'groundfighter' is going to be in control of the takedown? Maybe...maybe not. Depends on a LOT of factors our groundfighter may not be in control of. The above says that even if he is in a disadvantagous position he will quickly improve his position. Really? Maybe...but then again..maybe not. Again we aren't talking about a controlled environment that is weaponless.

A striker would just flail around ;z Not if he's trained properly in non-sport applications.

Quote:
How often do these strikers actually train these movements? The answer is usually not very often. Thus, they are a somewhat risky method of countering a grappler, who has practiced the movements they will be using many times before on resisting opponents.
It's a gross motor skill and doesn't take a whole lot of training to do. People with very little training effectively do this to save their own lives or the lives of others. It isn't 'risky', its smart.
Quote:
Eyegouging, biting and genital mandhandling are of course very uncomfortable for those on the recieving end, but they are not instant fight-enders.
I'm assuming the author was serious? I guess he's never had someone gouge his eye out in a fight ;Q Its a bit more than uncomfortable. About the only practical offering in the quote is that it might not necessarily be a 'fight stopper'...but someone...anyone tell me what a 100% fight stopper is please.

Quote:
if a grappler can beat you under a specific ruleset, chances are that when those rules are lifted, they can beat you even worse.
Ummm..no. Here is a FACT, people revert to their training in a crisis situation. As a result of adrenaline dump humans can experience tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, loss of manual dexterity etc. People who train for 'sport' will most likely revert to that mindset under duress. I've seen it happen multiple times. Making a 'switch' after rules have been lifted sounds great on paper to the uninitiated, but doesn't work well in real life. Sure there can be exceptions...do you want to bet your life on it?

Thats enough for now to make the point I'm trying to get across. Again, I like grappling. I teach grappling. But it isn't the roll around on a mat trying to get a tap out form of grappling. That is sport and I don't do sport.

Stay safe.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Deputydave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 19:22   #6
Deputydave
Senior Member
 
Deputydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
OK, I'll make you a deal, you try to eyegouge me on the ground and see how quick you get your arm broken.
Oh no,the dreaded internet challenge ;Q Ok tough guy, I'll be happy to PM or email you my school address and the times that I'm there and you feel free to come by and jump me in the parking lot. P.S. don't talk smack unless you're willing to back it up. Let me know about the pm/email.

Quote:
watching the UFC to see how a striker does on the ground and before you say anything about it being a "sport" it is the closest you can get to a streetfight without picking fights at a bar.
I've wathced the UFC and others, lots of fun. Its not real in terms of real life altercations with determined bgs trying to kill or seriously harm you though. It is a SPORT! Anything that has a referee, time outs, tap outs, rules, controlled environment, no weapons and a prize at the end is a sport.

Take out the ref and rules and add weapons and multiple attackers in an ambush and we'll see how far your sport training goes. Bottom line is this; realworld grappling is good for the realworld and bad for sport, sport grappling is good for sport and bad for the real world. There is a difference.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Deputydave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 19:34   #7
gr81disp
Bushbot v1.0
 
gr81disp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,613
Send a message via AIM to gr81disp
OK, how would a striker be better able to take down a grappler unless he was *gasp* also a grappler?

How would you stop someone more skilled than you on the ground from improving their position? Don't say anything like "I would hold them at gunpoint" because at that point how you fight is pointless.

How would the non-sport application of striking teach you to escape from a grappler pounding you into the ground?

So, your couple of hours of training is going to completely negate someone practicing for YEARS on getting a resisting human being to the ground? I got some beachside property in North Dakota you might be interested in.

What else should he say about eyegouging? It isn't a fightstopper, something even you agree on. PS A 100% fightstopper is choking someone unconscious.

So, in other words, someone will fight like they train. Grapplers train to put somebody in a very bad position that hurts like hell while they are resisting as hard as they can. Also, this point goes against your assertion that you can use gross motor skills in a stress situation after minimal training.

I will type slowly so you understand. The reason you grapple for tapout, is so your opponent knows that if you wanted to, you could break is arm, destroy his knee or choke him to DEATH. That is the point of grappling and if you consider rolling for a tap a sport, I feel sorry for your students as they must have their arms broken a lot.
__________________
"We will not cheat steal or lie, nor tolerate any among us who do."

If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory.
gr81disp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 19:53   #8
gr81disp
Bushbot v1.0
 
gr81disp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,613
Send a message via AIM to gr81disp
Sarcasm isn't your strong point, is it? Listen, while I always like going to other martial arts schools, I don't issue challenges. I have enough crap on my plate without worrying about how I am going to represent my art. In fact, the only beef I have with you is your apparent dismissal of anything that YOU deem not worthy of t4E 5tr33T as being irrelevant to self defense.

Basically, what I get from your post is that anything geared towards fighting, is not geared towards fighting. ;g Actually read what you have said, that two guys stepping the ring to beat the holy &$#! out of each other is nothing more than a sport because it has referees and minimal rules. So now we should have fights to the death to figure out how effective a martial art is? How about we give them guns and lock them in a lexan shielded cage? Do you have any idea how dumb it sounds that because it is a sport, it means that it is useless in multiple attacker scenarios? (BTW, how does your system address multiple attackers, unless it is with a gun, I have to say it is useless).
__________________
"We will not cheat steal or lie, nor tolerate any among us who do."

If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory.
gr81disp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 19:55   #9
Deputydave
Senior Member
 
Deputydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
So, your couple of hours of training is going to completely negate someone practicing for YEARS on getting a resisting human being to the ground?
My couple of hours of training? I checked your profile, I've started hardcore training 10 years before you were born. I've put eight years in the Military doing things in far away countries you've only watched in the movies. I've been a professional Executive Protection Agent on detail. I now have 14 years on the job and currently hold six separate Instructor certifications in high liability areas i.e. Combatives, DT & firearms. I'm an agency instructor, own my own school on the side and teach seminars. My students include off-duty Military, LEO and Corrections. I've trained over a thousand professionals in the last ten years and keep a running account of how they've done in real world altercations against violent felons. These accounts include everything from preventing a rape to preventing an escape.

How about you sport?

Quote:
How would you stop someone more skilled than you on the ground from improving their position? Don't say anything like "I would hold them at gunpoint" because at that point how you fight is pointless.
Your the first to mention holding anyone at 'gunpoint' in a ground fight ;Q And uh...at that point how you fight is the ONLY consideration!

Quote:
How would the non-sport application of striking teach you to escape from a grappler pounding you into the ground?
Your not far away, drive down and I'll teach you in one weekend. Its called combatives.

Quote:
A 100% fightstopper is choking someone unconscious.
If your able to, this isn't 100% either.

Quote:
I will type slowly so you understand. The reason you grapple for tapout, is so your opponent knows that if you wanted to, you could break is arm, destroy his knee or choke him to DEATH. That is the point of grappling and if you consider rolling for a tap a sport, I feel sorry for your students as they must have their arms broken a lot.
I'm begining to see your maturity level ;Q So here is my response, my students are professionals who fight real people in real situations. These are situations and people I hope you never face because you are clearly unprepared.

Still waiting for your Pm....
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Deputydave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 21:03   #10
BlackBelt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 429
Speaking of training, I went to a BJJ seminar once where the instructor had a story about a streetfight where one of the guys actually tapped the other guy, and the attacker paused just for second, because that's what he did in training. I don't know if it was a true story or not, but it does give one something to reflect on:
You WILL revert to your training under duress!!!
BlackBelt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 21:13   #11
Deputydave
Senior Member
 
Deputydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
You WILL revert to your training under duress!!!
Bingo! Thank you, somebody understands where I'm coming from. Here is a small quote from CQDT

Quote:
Q: How would sport training be useless in a real fight?

A: Sporting competitions have rules, referees, time outs and tap outs. The real world has none of these things. Those that learn to ‘fight’ within an artificial set of rules will do so under the stress of actual combat. Punching ‘point’ areas only or rolling around trying to submit an attacker. It’s useless and counter productive. Training on soft mats with the intention of going for an arm bar isn’t the same as fighting in between parked cars on asphalt, glass and oil spots with multiple attackers or one with a weapon. Trying to do some acrobatic, aerial spinning back kick against a real bad guy can have disastrous consequences as well.

We revert to how we train. Real life situations have taught us this hard lesson. High liability professionals have heard the horror examples of those that found out the hard way how true this statement is. Examples like the Police Officer who was on the wrong end of a bad guy’s handgun. The Officer quickly and successfully disarmed the bad guy only to hand the gun back to the bad guy. Why? Because that’s what he did in training a thousand times with a partner. Or the Officer shot to death because instead of reloading his revolver he took the time to pick up his spent brass and put it in his pocket just as he’d done on the range in training. These Officers weren’t stupid, not by any means. But we all react and revert to our training under stress. This can either be good or very, very bad.
This is a fact well known in LEO/military training circles. And in many 'arts' as well. Unfortunately it is apparently not known in enough. Not a flame, an observation.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Deputydave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 21:23   #12
neeko
Senior Member
 
neeko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,963
Aww gee can't I just shoot him mommy?
neeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 21:27   #13
ARH
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 40
I think these type of discussions always turn to **** because people start to confuse training methodology with fight strategy.

Fighting in a tournament requires a particular fight strategy in order to gain maximum benefit from the rules and point system. This includes favouring some techniques over others, and using them in different ways, and different venu's will require different strategies.

Likewise, training for self defence has its own requirements in its own right due to the different threats. This again will favour some techniques over others and will require a different fight strategy, but the training methodology used should be very similar.

Full contact port based training has proven itself to be highly successful in creating very well trained and conditioned athletes, and has proven itself to be very well established at creating the physical and psychological attributes required to be skilled at fighting, regardless of its venu. What happens is those training methodologies then need to be paired up with the necessary fight strategies for self defence, and not superimpose sport based fight strategies to self defence.

But what usually happens is instead of taking the successful components and moulding them into something useful, people fixate on the differences, throw the useful parts out entirely, and what we are left with is the tired old 'street vs sport' arguement, rather than the 'street and sport', which is what it should be.
__________________
The Fifth Column forum:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
ARH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2005, 21:41   #14
Deputydave
Senior Member
 
Deputydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,771
I understand what your saying and agree pretty much. What I'm saying is basically this; if your training for a competition then go for the arm bar and make him tap. If your a professional on-duty or a private citizen wanting to keep safe, training to for an arm bar and a tap out is ignorant. I have to say it the way I feel. It is ignorant. In SD the goal is to take out the attacker in the most direct way possible and regain your feet. The longer your on the ground fighting his fight the more can go wrong.

Look at it this way, try to 'sport' grapple someone who suddenly produces a shank. Things change very rapidly. In a street altercation one MUST train with the possibility of a weapon being present. Why? Becuase alot of bgs carry some type of weapon or use improvised weapons that become available during an altercation.

In short [wayyyy to late for that ;f ], sport is sport and SD is SD. They have 'some' common elements but there is more that is different that there is the same.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Deputydave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2005, 09:34   #15
mhill
Senior Member
 
mhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 2,310
This has definitely become a "my style is better than your style" argument.

I have sparred in mixed arts situations. I am the first one to say that you have to train grappling to be able to counter grappling. I don't know the first thing about it compared to these guys that train constantly in it. If you don't understand grappling you leave yourself open to their attacks. I've had this happen to me where just because I didn't understand what the person was doing they submitted me on the floor pretty quickly. Had I been aware of how I was leaving myself open I would have been able to prevent it. And they can get you on the ground really quick.

I respect all styles for what they are. Even TKD teaches great technique and sparring. ;g ;g

No technique that I know of goes full contact/no rules in practice so there is nobody that has training practice without limits. I don't think I'd be interested in sparring at a school where biting was legal.;P ;P

Fact is every style has it's pluses and minuses. I've studied: TKD, Shorin-ryu, Judo, a precursor to Krav Maga, and Wrestling. They all have there places with strong and week points. Any of them is better than nothing.

mhill
__________________
mhill
"You might find the taco of your dreams while gassing up. " - BikerGoddess
mhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2005, 09:44   #16
Roundeyesamurai
Sensei Member
 
Roundeyesamurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,773
Send a message via AIM to Roundeyesamurai Send a message via Yahoo to Roundeyesamurai
Quote:
Originally posted by mhill
This has definitely become a "my style is better than your style" argument.
Imagine that! ;Q
Roundeyesamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2005, 10:09   #17
MARTIN FISHER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,768
I disagree that learning how to tap someone out is worthless in a street fight. I train Gracie JJ, and I can tell you from experiance, it is much easier to be the one producing the shank/blade, gouging an eye or pounding someone with elbows if I can control a person on the ground first. Those elements are easy to put in and train once someone knows how to ground a stronger/bigger person.

I also disagree that just because a person knows how to fight for real will automatically win over someone who is a better ground fighter. Again, if the "real" fighter cannot control a person on the ground, they will not be able to win, no matter how dirty they fight.

Let me tell you this, When I first started with Paul Vunaks PFS, there was little or no ground fighting. The dogma was headbutt knee and elbow the guy before he gets you to the ground.

Then a guy named Rorion came along and issued the $100,000 Gracie Challenge, and then the UFC. Guess what? Now everyone is either on the ground or going around claiming their art will beat the ground fighter with just some simple dirty tricks everyone has been doing for the last 6000 years.

Well, the groundfighters (wrestlers, BJJ, whatever) are still here and for the most part still dominating every underground and no-holds barred stuff out there including the dreaded street fight.

Back to Paul Vunak and PFS, guess who he started training with and guess what he started to incorperate into PFS, you guessed it, Gracie JJ, mostly under Rickson. Why? Because ignoring the ground is a fatal flaw in most MA systems. Saying the ground is not as important as anyother range is also a fatal flaw, the flaw the Gracies and many others have made a wonderfull living of choking, armbarring or just beating the crap out of fighters who say otherwise.

As far as multiple adversaries, well, I dont care how many black belts you have, if they are serious about hurting you and you have no weapon, your going to get hurt.
MARTIN FISHER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2005, 13:26   #18
gr81disp
Bushbot v1.0
 
gr81disp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,613
Send a message via AIM to gr81disp
That is what I have been trying to say, but I lose my temper too easily to keep coherent points together.

I am going to leave this thread, because I think I am right, you think you are right, and neither one of us is going to convince the other. The other posters are right, this has become a "my art is better than your art" thread which is explicitly NOT what I wanted this forum to become. If I stay here, chances are we will just keep going in this vein for pages, so this is not only not productive, but destructive, so I bow out.
__________________
"We will not cheat steal or lie, nor tolerate any among us who do."

If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory.
gr81disp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2005, 13:41   #19
mhill
Senior Member
 
mhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 2,310
gr81disp, taps out.

Match goes to Deputydave!!! ;e ;e

It's a joke relax. ;f ;f ;f

Now let's get back to the important stuff like could Bruce Lee really beat up the great Ali. ;Q

mhill
__________________
mhill
"You might find the taco of your dreams while gassing up. " - BikerGoddess
mhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2005, 14:07   #20
Deputydave
Senior Member
 
Deputydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
Originally posted by mhill
gr81disp, taps out.

Match goes to Deputydave!!! ;e ;e

It's a joke relax. ;f ;f ;f

Now let's get back to the important stuff like could Bruce Lee really beat up the great Ali. ;Q

mhill
;f

This was never about 'my style is better than your style' and it is a shame it is viewed in this fashion. It is about sport objectives vs street objectives. They differ, it is as simple as that. I never said sport training is worthless in and of itself, only that we tend to revert to our training under duress. This is a fact that is well documented. Both have their place. As a professional that uses it in the course of duty, and as a trainer who teaches professionals we simply don't do 'sport'. We do not try to 'tap' out a violent felon.

Anyway, cheers
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Deputydave is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 -6. The time now is 21:11.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,244
388 Members
856 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31