A curious outlook on self-defense learning

[Gerry Seymour]

Is it possible that in some tough neighborhoods, street fights are more a matter of course?

I'm not talking about two idiots trying to prove their manhood, I'm talking about a guy in a bar in a tough neighborhood, who can't talk down a drunken bully, so he has to defend himself?

If so, is it possible that the guy can teach us a bit about how drunken bullies behave, for example, when they mean it, when they don't?

Yes. And those who had to deal with these situations do have useful experience. Whether it's the actual fighting technique depends on a few factors (their success, their ethics, etc.), but they certainly should be able to shed some light on the things you referred to.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Why?

It's unlikely to include time to control distance, you can't count on them not hitting below the belt or biting, and they will be less predictable (and less skilled, probably) than what we're used to seeing in training areas (of any style).

Now add in the difference in environment, the need to watch for other attackers (their friends), and the possibility of weapons we didn't see. There's more, but those are most of the major differences.

EDIT: Oh, and rage, with all its commensurate power, violence, and over-commitment.

 

[drop bear]

It's unlikely to include time to control distance, you can't count on them not hitting below the belt or biting, and they will be less predictable (and less skilled, probably) than what we're used to seeing in training areas (of any style).

Now add in the difference in environment, the need to watch for other attackers (their friends), and the possibility of weapons we didn't see. There's more, but those are most of the major differences.

EDIT: Oh, and rage, with all its commensurate power, violence, and over-commitment.

Exept. Self defence apparently also doesn't look like a street fight.

Which would include those variables.

 

[drop bear]

By the way anecdotally.

 

[Juany118]

When ever I see one of Jake's videos I remember this...
18 Chambers: Fading Smoke, Broken Mirrors: An Open Letter To Jack Mace

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Exept. Self defence apparently also doesn't look like a street fight.

Which would include those variables.

I would say that's true, if by "street fight" you mean two guys squaring off. Yeah, the self-defense component in that situation is usually to walk away from the situation before it gets to that point or otherwise de-escalate rather than accepting the fight. I'm not saying those components never exist in self-defense - certainly there can be time in some situations to control and gauge like you'd do in a competition. It's just not likely to happen - it's just far from the most common scenario in an attack on the street.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

By the way anecdotally.

Yes, and that fits my description. He didn't step into the fight the other guy started in the parking lot, and never had time/space to control distance on the first hit.

With the "boat rage" incident, he had the opportunity to control, which I assume he did, since he seems to have easily avoided the "sneaker right". He could probably have avoided the physical altercation entirely if he hadn't gone after the guy. It wouldn't be easy. I can't say for sure I'd manage to keep my emotions any better under control than he did.

 

[drop bear]

Yes, and that fits my description. He didn't step into the fight the other guy started in the parking lot, and never had time/space to control distance on the first hit.

With the "boat rage" incident, he had the opportunity to control, which I assume he did, since he seems to have easily avoided the "sneaker right". He could probably have avoided the physical altercation entirely if he hadn't gone after the guy. It wouldn't be easy. I can't say for sure I'd manage to keep my emotions any better under control than he did.

But possibly not the insane rage monster that jake was describing.

 

[drop bear]

I would say that's true, if by "street fight" you mean two guys squaring off. Yeah, the self-defense component in that situation is usually to walk away from the situation before it gets to that point or otherwise de-escalate rather than accepting the fight. I'm not saying those components never exist in self-defense - certainly there can be time in some situations to control and gauge like you'd do in a competition. It's just not likely to happen - it's just far from the most common scenario in an attack on the street.

Yeah. But you dont compare them in their entirety. You chop up the elements and compare them that way.

If we are looking at a three or ten second self defence situation. It wont contain all the elements of a 15 minute fight.

But there will be 3 ot 10 second sections that will.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. But you dont compare them in their entirety. You chop up the elements and compare them that way.

If we are looking at a three or ten second self defence situation. It wont contain all the elements of a 15 minute fight.

But there will be 3 ot 10 second sections that will.

I don't think you'll necessarily find all those elements in a 3-10 second section. But yes, you will find areas of a self-defense situation that has elements found in competition. Not in every SD situation, but certainly in many. That's what makes some competition training valid prep for self-defense.

 

[JP3]

Generally, I agree with the guy in the video.

 

[drop bear]

I don't think you'll necessarily find all those elements in a 3-10 second section. But yes, you will find areas of a self-defense situation that has elements found in competition. Not in every SD situation, but certainly in many. That's what makes some competition training valid prep for self-defense.

I don't think it is about finding every element though. Just what will work in a context. So a striking style can't grapple but say you want to have that in your tool box.
You add grappling.

Now in this context it is pretty obvious. But street sport. You can say there is a style that performs against a whole bunch of known attacks. Lets dump the whole thing because it doesnt cover deescalation. Which becomes a bit of madness in. My mind.

 

[drop bear]

I don't think it is about finding every element though. Just what will work in a context. So a striking style can't grapple but say you want to have that in your tool box.
You add grappling.

Now in this context it is pretty obvious. But street sport. You can say there is a style that performs against a whole bunch of known attacks. Lets dump the whole thing because it doesnt cover deescalation. Which becomes a bit of madness in. My mind.

Bjj gets this treatment a bit. So mabye they can hold down and choke out most other people on the planet. If five guys jumped them while they did that they would be in trouble.

So lets not tweak bjj to reduce those risks add some other elements while trying to maintain the strengths of the system. Lets do bloody krav instead.

 

[Midnight-shadow]

Exept. Self defence apparently also doesn't look like a street fight.

Which would include those variables.

In my opinion it doesn't. The main difference between a street fight and self-defense for me is that in a street fight, both sides are willing participants, whereas in self-defense one side are not willing participants. Yes the physical aspect of the confrontation may be the same but the mentality is completely different. Just look at the expected outcome of both scenarios. If I'm engaging in a street fight my end goal is to win the fight by beating the other guy into submission, but in self-defense my number one aim is to avoid taking damage and if possible escape the situation as quickly as possible.

 

[Deleted member 34973]

Imo...if you have never actually been in a street fight, you should not be teaching any type of fighting or self defense. Simply because a person with no real world application, is not qualified and such a person is only endangering the lives of those he/she teachs.
I never did get how people think that with no real world experience, their opinion should be followed.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't think it is about finding every element though. Just what will work in a context. So a striking style can't grapple but say you want to have that in your tool box.
You add grappling.

Now in this context it is pretty obvious. But street sport. You can say there is a style that performs against a whole bunch of known attacks. Lets dump the whole thing because it doesnt cover deescalation. Which becomes a bit of madness in. My mind.

At what point did anyone say "dump it"? You're battling strawmen again.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Imo...if you have never actually been in a street fight, you should not be teaching any type of fighting or self defense. Simply because a person with no real world application, is not qualified and such a person is only endangering the lives of those he/she teachs.
I never did get how people think that with no real world experience, their opinion should be followed.

I'd agree with you entirely, if such experience were readily available without going out and seeking altercations. Most people will rarely have an opportunity to get attacked. If their self-defense is good, they will avoid the attack before things turn physical. I do not have a desire to learn from someone who made choices that repeatedly put them in those situations, except for those who do it professionally (LEO's, bouncers, etc.). Now, if I found an instructor who used to be an idiot and got into a lot of scraps, then turned his life around and was using that experience to teach, that'd be a decent bonus, except that he's still teaching more about fighting than defending.

I prefer a teacher who has proven he can respond to a threat in a real-world situation, but that's about all you can get from someone who doesn't fit into one of the three categories I mentioned above. Beyond that, I'd just want to see that he can handle some resistance in sparring/randori.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Bjj gets this treatment a bit. So mabye they can hold down and choke out most other people on the planet. If five guys jumped them while they did that they would be in trouble.

So lets not tweak bjj to reduce those risks add some other elements while trying to maintain the strengths of the system. Lets do bloody krav instead.

I agree with your frustration. I think the main reason BJJ gets such harsh responses is that so many in the BJJ world put it forth as "the answer", rather than acknowledging the obvious problems. There's nothing wrong with BJJ, so long as you don't go to the ground in the wrong situations because it's the only tool you have. I like it enough that I'm hoping to have time to get to a friend's school and go through the Gracie Combatives in the next year, to beef up my ground game.

 

[Deleted member 34973]

Although

I'd agree with you entirely, if such experience were readily available without going out and seeking altercations. Most people will rarely have an opportunity to get attacked. If their self-defense is good, they will avoid the attack before things turn physical. I do not have a desire to learn from someone who made choices that repeatedly put them in those situations, except for those who do it professionally (LEO's, bouncers, etc.). Now, if I found an instructor who used to be an idiot and got into a lot of scraps, then turned his life around and was using that experience to teach, that'd be a decent bonus, except that he's still teaching more about fighting than defending.

I prefer a teacher who has proven he can respond to a threat in a real-world situation, but that's about all you can get from someone who doesn't fit into one of the three categories I mentioned above. Beyond that, I'd just want to see that he can handle some resistance in sparring/randori.

Although I partially agree with you, a so called self defense scenario, rarely can be avoided in the real world. I understand that a lot of people train in this and in how to avoid conflict, but a lot of it is just not based in reality. Nor is it based in actual dangerous situations.

Thats the thing with real life situations.

The reason why a lot of martial arts do not work on the streets, is not due to the art, but do to the lack of real world self defense experience on the part of the instructor.

I, personally, would never train under anyone who lacked real world experience and is the reason why finding a qualified instructor, is a rarety.

People do not put themselves in bad situations a majority of the time. **** just hapoens.

There are some places(a lot actually) where it has nothing to do with a person even looking for trouble or even knowing that they are in a place with such a threat.

I see that thought quite a bit here on martial talk and always think, its not that simple.

I myself, have never picked a fight nor went looking for one. But, I have been in a few, whether it was defending myself or protecting others. I have seen several people try to use the Descalation tactics to no avail.

It works for the police sure, but that is a give me. Simply because with an LEO, there is a lot more to deal with than just the cop standing in front of you, their guns and the threat of jail that comes with them, is why people back down. Not the techniques LEO's use to descalate the situation. IMO

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Although

Although I partially agree with you, a so called self defense scenario, rarely can be avoided in the real world. I understand that a lot of people train in this and in how to avoid conflict, but a lot of it is just not based in reality. Nor is it based in actual dangerous situations.

Thats the thing with real life situations.

The reason why a lot of martial arts do not work on the streets, is not due to the art, but do to the lack of real world self defense experience on the part of the instructor.

I, personally, would never train under anyone who lacked real world experience and is the reason why finding a qualified instructor, is a rarety.

People do not put themselves in bad situations a majority of the time. **** just hapoens.

There are some places(a lot actually) where it has nothing to do with a person even looking for trouble or even knowing that they are in a place with such a threat.

I see that thought quite a bit here on martial talk and always think, its not that simple.

I myself, have never picked a fight nor went looking for one. But, I have been in a few, whether it was defending myself or protecting others. I have seen several people try to use the Descalation tactics to no avail.

It works for the police sure, but that is a give me. Simply because with an LEO, there is a lot more to deal with than just the cop standing in front of you, their guns and the threat of jail that comes with them, is why people back down. Not the techniques LEO's use to descalate the situation. IMO

The issue is a statistical one. Most people will maybe have one physical encounter in their adult lives. One encounter is not nearly enough to make any judgement on - it can only provide anecdotal input. If someone has 4 or 5, you can start to draw some conclusions of their psychological readiness, but still not their techniques, since they've only demonstrated against a maximum of 4 or 5 attacks (probably less, since many altercations will center around punches). My dad has had a few encounters, including one with a gun. More encounters than me, and all "successful" in that he walked away uninjured. He would not be a good source for self-defense training, neither physical nor avoidance.

De-escalation does work, but not every time (like the physical techniques). I've used it successfully more than once. (I've also failed to use it, and managed to back the other party down - not sure where to classify that one.) Where you see it fail, it was either mis-applied, or it was never going to work there. What you don't see is how often it does work, because those encounters stay relatively quiet and we never notice them unless we're in the middle of them. Avoidance works even better, and there's literally no way to notice that one, since nothing happens, at all. The same goes for target-hardening (making yourself a less desirable target).

EDIT: This statistical issue is why Drop Bear has a point when he talks about "validation" of technique. We can't expect enough street encounters to fully validate a technique or a person, so we have to add in some in-school validation: sparring, competition, randori, purposely resisting a technique, etc.