Bullshido Video Analyses

[Buka]

I suck at handcuffing. Always have and thankfully never will have to again.

I can get out of cuffs fairly easy if left alone for forty seconds, though. Always had fun with that, even got written up for it a few times.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I suck at handcuffing. Always have and thankfully never will have to again.

I can get out of cuffs fairly easy if left alone for forty seconds, though. Always had fun with that, even got written up for it a few times.

Only had to take out the handcuffs once in my security career, and that was because a gang 5 young guys walked in to the hospital and we were expecting trouble and I was planning on hitting at least the first one that came at me with the cuffs. But luckily they all seemed to have a nickel allergy and when the cuffs came out, they all simmered down.

 

[Hot Lunch]

I don't think this one is bullshido. Any technique can be disrupted by a resisting opponent if you don't time it correctly.

Facebook

www.facebook.com

 

[JowGaWolf]

There's certainly plenty of bad technique being taught out there. Rather than just pointing and laughing, it might be more instructive to break down how this technique might have been created, what it gets right, and how it went wrong.

So ... the idea behind the technique being shown is actually a useful principle to understand. Leaving aside for a moment the faulty understanding of cuffing technique, the person doing the demo has their arms bent behind them, with upward pressure being applied to their wrists at right angles to their upper arms. This gives the person holding them a mechanical advantage. Not a huge advantage, given that the arms aren't fully bent, but enough that the defender probably can't force their arms straight without possessing superior strength. If only one arm was held, then the defender could rotate their body to change the angle of force, but with both arms being held, that isn't an option. So by jumping upwards, the defender is able to straighten their arm without fighting directly against the attacker's force. Once their arm is straight, then the attacker's upwards force is now travelling along the length of the arm rather than coming in at right angles to a bent arm and offers no mechanical advantage, making it easy to break free. This concept - moving in an unrestricted direction to change the angle of a limb so that it isn't vulnerable to control - is very useful in escaping submissions.

No, where it went wrong ...

Firstly, there's the lack of understanding of how cuffing procedure works. I've never worked in law enforcement, so I'm certainly no expert. But the way the attacker is holding the defender in this video doesn't seem particularly conducive to effectively handcuffing either a compliant or a resisting suspect. (Here, I started to speculate, then decided it would be smarter to just search YouTube for instruction in proper LEO handcuffing methods. Sure enough, none of them show anything like what the attacker using in the video and the demonstrated technique would be irrelevant or ineffective for any of them.)

Secondly, even if we leave aside the stated "resisting arrest" scenario, the demo fails to take into account what could happen if the attacker doesn't just stand there statically. If as the defender jumps upwards, the attacker raises their wrists to follow, then gravity will put the defender in a much deeper double hammerlock position and possibly injure them as they come back down.

Thirdly, putting aside any arguments about the ethics of resisting arrest, the real world practicalities are that it rarely leads to improved outcomes for the person resisting. Possible results can range anywhere from being dogpiled and handcuffed in a much more painful way all the way to being shot dead. (In fairness, the video only shows a clip of the technique without explanation. It's possible that the instructor was actually just trying to demo a technique for escaping a poorly executed double hammerlock and whoever posted it to Facebook added the "resist arrest" headline as clickbait.)

So, what do we have? We have a legitimately useful physical principle (probably learned via techniques which have actually been properly tested) being creatively applied to a novel context, but without any attempt to investigate the realities of that particular situation or testing to see what flaws the new technique might have against a resisting opponent. That describes ... well, rather a lot of the bad techniques I see being taught by instructors who have some legitimate skills in other areas.

I think finding video of stuff that works is a better approach than looking for things that don't. From there it's easier to spot the key things that make a technique functional.

The principles shown in the video are based on the context that someone will try to restaing you in the same manner. At the minimum the accuracy of the attack is more important than the defensive technique.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I think finding video of stuff that works is a better approach than looking for things that don't. From there it's easier to spot the key things that make a technique functional.

The principles shown in the video are based on the context that someone will try to restaing you in the same manner. At the minimum the accuracy of the attack is more important than the defensive technique.

Oh, I certainly wouldn't want to try learning (or teaching) the underlying concept from such a fundamentally flawed technique. But I find it interesting to do a forensic breakdown and figure out how someone came up with the idea in the first place.

I also find it instructive to note that the same pattern comes up repeatedly:

1) Practitioner learns some legitimate concepts (often through the vehicle of existing techniques which are functional at least in a certain context).
2) Practitioner tries to apply those concepts to a novel situation, not taking the time to learn the relevant differences in the new context. (Often including the way that certain attacks are actually performed.)
3) Practitioner fails to test the new application against competent resisting opponents.
4) Practitioner gains unwarranted confidence in a technique which may range anywhere from suboptimal to complete garbage.
5) Practitioner teaches the new technique to students who have no frame of reference to judge its practicality.
6) Some students accept what they have been taught on faith and resist any suggestion that their teacher may have given them flawed material.
7) Other students eventually recognize that not all of what they have been taught is functional and (assuming they don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater and go train something else) are faced with the challenge of going back through their lessons to figure out what elements are practical in the right context, what that context might be, which techniques are functional, which are useful just for training certain attributes or concepts, which need to be tweaked, and which need to be thrown out entirely.

This isn't the only way that martial arts and martial artists can get off track, but it's definitely a common path.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I don't think this one is bullshido. Any technique can be disrupted by a resisting opponent if you don't time it correctly.

Facebook

www.facebook.com

Eh, it needs some tweaking to have a reasonable chance of success against anyone who isn't completely asleep at the wheel. But it's more fixable than the technique in your original post.

 

[mograph]

... not taking the time to learn the relevant differences in the new context.

Yes. Context always matters.

 

[JowGaWolf]

But I find it interesting to do a forensic breakdown and figure out how someone came up with the idea in the first place.

There is a description on the video of what was happening. "When restraint is applied from behind this way, the force of resistance is lateral rather than vertical. By jumping and bearing ones's entire weight down on the Lung 7 point on the wrist, the grip can be broken easily. This is the first set of Dwi-uh Soo sett from Kuk Sool Kwan Hapkido which are concerned with grapples from behind."

 

[JowGaWolf]

Oh, I certainly wouldn't want to try learning (or teaching) the underlying concept from such a fundamentally flawed technique. But I find it interesting to do a forensic breakdown and figure out how someone came up with the idea in the first place.

I also find it instructive to note that the same pattern comes up repeatedly:

1) Practitioner learns some legitimate concepts (often through the vehicle of existing techniques which are functional at least in a certain context).
2) Practitioner tries to apply those concepts to a novel situation, not taking the time to learn the relevant differences in the new context. (Often including the way that certain attacks are actually performed.)
3) Practitioner fails to test the new application against competent resisting opponents.
4) Practitioner gains unwarranted confidence in a technique which may range anywhere from suboptimal to complete garbage.
5) Practitioner teaches the new technique to students who have no frame of reference to judge its practicality.
6) Some students accept what they have been taught on faith and resist any suggestion that their teacher may have given them flawed material.
7) Other students eventually recognize that not all of what they have been taught is functional and (assuming they don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater and go train something else) are faced with the challenge of going back through their lessons to figure out what elements are practical in the right context, what that context might be, which techniques are functional, which are useful just for training certain attributes or concepts, which need to be tweaked, and which need to be thrown out entirely.

This isn't the only way that martial arts and martial artists can get off track, but it's definitely a common path.

I really don't like #7. It's the easy way out. Why train a system if the answer to every road block is to train a different system. Totally nuts and irritating to me. I would even go as far as to says that #7 occurs much earlier on in your list. Like right after#3 lol

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I really don't like #7. It's the easy way out. Why train a system if the answer to every road block is to train a different system. Totally nuts and irritating to me. I would even go as far as to says that #7 occurs much earlier on in your list. Like right after#3 lol

Well, number 7 only becomes necessary if the practitioner’s instructor (or several generations of instructors) have gone through those previous steps, resulting in a curriculum where gems are mixed in with trash.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I don't think this one is bullshido. Any technique can be disrupted by a resisting opponent if you don't time it correctly.

Facebook

www.facebook.com

I can think of much better ways to deal with that arm.
1. Don't try move it back "That's such a long way. The shorter route would be to simply grab the opponent's pressing hand with the same hand he's using. If my opponent presses with the right hand, then I want to use my right hand. If my opponent presses with the left hand then I want to use my right left hand."

In the video. He should use the hand he's waving with to seize the pressing hand. Then twist that hand towards the opponent's center by using grip strength and the torso to twist to the right (towards the opponent's center.) This forces the opponent to punch or attack across his body.

The way that is shown in the video has too many variables. Especially since somehow, he goes from wrist control to thumb control with the lock. For me personally I can twist that wrist faster than I can move to the side of my opponent. Not for me. It definitely not my first choice when there are faster and quicker ways to handle that type of "attack"

 

[drop bear]

The only time I handcuffed people was with my knee on their neck.

Which would make that escape less viable.

 

[Oily Dragon]

I don't think this one is bullshido. Any technique can be disrupted by a resisting opponent if you don't time it correctly.

Facebook

www.facebook.com

Staged video is staged video. It was pretty obvious that the first part was just a demo, and the second was a goofy attempt to show that a big guy can manhandle a smaller guy moving really slowly. Obviously the big guy is not going to stand there and let the little guy do whatever, but it's not even done in real time.

And It's almost as if they intentionally made the second aggressor 50lbs of muscle and a foot of height over the dude he puts through the wall.

A lot of people will call anything bullshido, until it's done on them and they cry for you to stop. A read through a lot of the comments on that video will show people are kind of ignorant and just want to throw stones.

There's no need to fabricate new "ITS FAKE" shorts on TikTok and stuff, I think we have plenty of video already, going back almost 30 years.

 

[Mider]

Not a fan of these threads or videos, suddenly everyone thinks their an expert when many admit they’re not even black belts.

I follow the instructor in the video on social media and he’s highly respected in the hapkido world.

this place seems bi polar, one day everyone trashes aikido, TMA, then the next I’m being told I can’t call any place a mcdojo

 

[Buka]

7) Other students eventually recognize that not all of what they have been taught is functional and (assuming they don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater and go train something else) are faced with the challenge of going back through their lessons to figure out what elements are practical in the right context, what that context might be, which techniques are functional, which are useful just for training certain attributes or concepts, which need to be tweaked, and which need to be thrown out entirely.

The entire post was spot on. To me, number seven was key. I believe a Martial Artist should constantly go over, study, question and look at "what elements are practical in the right context" "what that context might be" "which techniques are functional" "which are useful just for training certain attributes or concepts" "which need to be tweaked" etc.

If for no other reason than to constantly renew and polish your own skills, remind yourself constantly about things in your toolbox, improve your understanding and teaching ability.

Please forgive the movie pun but number seven was magnificent. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

 

[JowGaWolf]

Not a fan of these threads or videos, suddenly everyone thinks their an expert when many admit they’re not even black belts.

I follow the instructor in the video on social media and he’s highly respected in the hapkido world.

this place seems bi polar, one day everyone trashes aikido, TMA, then the next I’m being told I can’t call any place a mcdojo

I don't think everyone thinks they are an expert just because of analysis of one technique. or one demo. The first comment was about how the restraint of the hands were performed. The title mentioned Hapkido Resist Arrest. which means all the law enforcement people are going to have a say in that part.

In terms of Arrest and how to arrest people. I'm going to listen to the law enforcement people in here. They know how officers are trained to restrain hands behind the back. They have experience with this on people who comply and people who resist. In that case they are the subject matter experts.

The jump part is a mechanics things. It's not a martial arts things. Simply look at the moving parts and determine what needs to go right in order to make the technique work. Then determine the ways that things could go wrong or change. That much analysis can be done without any martial arts knowledge,

 

[JowGaWolf]

Not a fan of these threads or videos, suddenly everyone thinks their an expert when many admit they’re not even black belts.

I follow the instructor in the video on social media and he’s highly respected in the hapkido world.

this place seems bi polar, one day everyone trashes aikido, TMA, then the next I’m being told I can’t call any place a mcdojo

Not sure if it makes any difference to you, but no one mentioned anything about the rest of the demo.

 

[Mider]

I don't think everyone thinks they are an expert just because of analysis of one technique. or one demo. The first comment was about how the restraint of the hands were performed. The title mentioned Hapkido Resist Arrest. which means all the law enforcement people are going to have a say in that part.

In terms of Arrest and how to arrest people. I'm going to listen to the law enforcement people in here. They know how officers are trained to restrain hands behind the back. They have experience with this on people who comply and people who resist. In that case they are the subject matter experts.

The jump part is a mechanics things. It's not a martial arts things. Simply look at the moving parts and determine what needs to go right in order to make the technique work. Then determine the ways that things could go wrong or change. That much analysis can be done without any martial arts knowledge,

I’ve met a few who consider themselves experts here. To be fair law enforcement officers go to martial arts trainers to learn how to fight and train…I know of plenty of teachers who teach them. So if this man is not a cop that would be irrelevant

I wouldn’t know what would make the move work, I don’t know every art on earth to critique, I know of certain arts that look like nonsense that seem to do fine.

I try not to look at videos and say this would or wouldn’t work i wouldn’t know, in fact I can say even many experts wouldn’t know. Instead of arguing over it I’d rather look at the majority of his work and see 8f he knows what he’s doing

taking one video is silly…we can do that to anyone

 

[Mider]

Not sure if it makes any difference to you, but no one mentioned anything about the rest of the demo.

I am just being honest

 

[JowGaWolf]

I am just being honest

What I meant by my statement is that. The comments that were made were mostly about the restraint and how it wasn't applied realistically. It appears that no one had issues with the rest of it.

My only issue is the accuracy of that attack that is being defended against.. I've just seen how a low quality attack or an inaccurate one can lead to misconceptions of what is possible.

This is one of the risk that everyone has when doing demos. No one is immune from it.