Can a martial art kills?

[drop bear]

Maybe.

OK.

I meant what I wrote, violent criminals typically have a history of, well, violence. They're well acquainted with both dealing out and receiving physical violence. It's part of their lives and usually always has been.

"Martial Artists" from the suburbs often seem to believe that everyone lived lives as civilized as theirs has been and that at the first sign of resistance the bad guy will just give up. Just bop 'em in the nose right?

No. Most violent criminals have a history of violence and know exactly what being bopped in the nose is like and, whether or not it "bothers" them, they certainly know how to work through it.

After finding out that I'm a "Martial Artist," one guy spent several minutes telling that "everyone has a plan until you sock 'em in the beak." <sigh>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I think martial arts training has to include a level of violence. And yes I don't think people get how much of an issue a just genuinely tough dude can be.

I have mentioned why before.

 

[jobo]

Yes, but the term "criminal violence" specifically refers to the way criminals go about violence, which different from the way trained martial artist or 'street fighters' does.

A mugger will ask for directions (as an example) in order to disguise their real intent, and then when you are distracted giving them directions they will sucker punch you then steal your phone/wallet etc. They won't take up a fighting stance an offer to go three five minutes rounds with you with the winner going home with your belongings. A lot of MA's assume that engaging in a consensual fighting is the same as defending yourself from self criminal violence.

Case in point Drop Bear, who I don't even have to take off ignore to know has missed this point entirely and displayed his unwavering inability to distinguish between the two.

Here ended, today's lesson.

your making a distinction were there is non , all violence is criminal, save the few exceptions, therefore all violence is criminal violence,

 

[drop bear]

your making a distinction were there is non , all violence is criminal, save the few exceptions, therefore all violence is criminal violence,

Not really. He thinks there is a fundamentally different mechanic to shaping up and bashing some dude over an insult. Bashing them for their wallet and bashing them in the ring.

So therefore the training should be focused on these different aspects.

Rather than focusing on bashing dudes and then adding situational skills.

My view is it is all sizzle and no steak.

 

[jobo]

Not really. He thinks there is a fundamentally different mechanic to shaping up and bashing some dude over an insult. Bashing them for their wallet and bashing them in the ring.

So therefore the training should be focused on these different aspects.

Rather than focusing on bashing dudes and then adding situational skills.

My view is it is all sizzle and no steak.

I'm with you , the most important issue, is that you can bash, every thing after that is just window,dressing, which is of no use at all unless you can bash them

 

[drop bear]

I'm with you , the most important issue, is that you can bash, every thing after that is just window,dressing, which is of no use at all unless you can bash them

Correct. Which Is why wrestles and boxers win street fights. Their primary method ultimately works. Even though their methods are fundamentally different.

 

[jobo]

Correct. Which Is why wrestles and boxers win street fights. Their primary method ultimately works. Even though their methods are fundamentally different.

but karate say, should fundamentally work, that if you train the basics till your good enough, rather than complicate it with a multitude of useless techniques

 

[drop bear]

but karate say, should fundamentally work, that if you train the basics till your good enough, rather than complicate it with a multitude of useless techniques

Also correct. And with that idea you can then go to say a karate school and see it work. Or have had it work somewhere.

I should stand up to scrutiny without having to come up with excuses like it will work but self defence is such a unique beast that it is somehow compromised everywhere else.

Except for the one place you can't check.

 

[JR 137]

Correct. Which Is why wrestles and boxers win street fights. Their primary method ultimately works. Even though their methods are fundamentally different.

Wrestlers and boxers win street fights due to their training methods. What training methods? Getting hit/tackled/etc. and keep going, while realizing they’ not made of glass; working the basics over and over again, against non-resisting partners, semi-resisting partners and fully resisting partners; practicing advanced techniques over and over against non-resisting partners, semi-resisting partners to the point of making them easily usable against fully resisting partners. Fully resisted competition leaves no realistic “what if’s;” it either worked for you that night or it didn’t. You can either do it against your opponent and other opponents, or you can’t and need to get back into the gym and practice some more.

Pretty much any martial art can do this and be truly effective. It’s not the art, it’s the training methods and the willingness of the MAist to do this and stop making excuses. One can do point fighting or do full contact/knockdown. One can make their forms look pretty or actually break down the movements and apply them against resistance. One can break a few boards or concrete blocks and feel strong or do body conditioning.

Some do the easy stuff, some do a combination of the easy stuff and the hard stuff, others do all the hard stuff. Learning some moves or even a complete system, be it traditional MA, MMA, boxing, wrestling, etc. won’t make you “tough.” Training it the right way will. Many people don’t want to feel pain. Many people don’t want to put in the work. Many people feel good about lying to themselves about what they’re actually training for.

Everyone’s got to do what they’ve got to do. Many people don’t have the need nor desire to train like they’re preparing to fight. They train because they like to for a variety of reasons. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[drop bear]

Wrestlers and boxers win street fights due to their training methods. What training methods? Getting hit/tackled/etc. and keep going, while realizing they’ not made of glass; working the basics over and over again, against non-resisting partners, semi-resisting partners and fully resisting partners; practicing advanced techniques over and over against non-resisting partners, semi-resisting partners to the point of making them easily usable against fully resisting partners. Fully resisted competition leaves no realistic “what if’s;” it either worked for you that night or it didn’t. You can either do it against your opponent and other opponents, or you can’t and need to get back into the gym and practice some more.

Pretty much any martial art can do this and be truly effective. It’s not the art, it’s the training methods and the willingness of the MAist to do this and stop making excuses. One can do point fighting or do full contact/knockdown. One can make their forms look pretty or actually break down the movements and apply them against resistance. One can break a few boards or concrete blocks and feel strong or do body conditioning.

Some do the easy stuff, some do a combination of the easy stuff and the hard stuff, others do all the hard stuff. Learning some moves or even a complete system, be it traditional MA, MMA, boxing, wrestling, etc. won’t make you “tough.” Training it the right way will. Many people don’t want to feel pain. Many people don’t want to put in the work. Many people feel good about lying to themselves about what they’re actually training for.

Everyone’s got to do what they’ve got to do. Many people don’t have the need nor desire to train like they’re preparing to fight. They train because they like to for a variety of reasons. Nothing wrong with that.

Not really. You can train dumb stuff with resistance. Capoeira would be a prime example.

They train hard. Just what they train is not as efficient as say a combat sport.

They can get away with it because the other guy is doing capoeira as well.

It also isn't really designed to be the most efficient method of messing a guy up.

TKD can fall in to this trap. Sport jujitsu falls into this trap.

The style will determine what you train. And that will effect your strengths and weakness's.

And people cross train for pretty much this reason.

 

[JR 137]

Not really. You can train dumb stuff with resistance. Capoeira would be a prime example.

They train hard. Just what they train is not as efficient as say a combat sport.

They can get away with it because the other guy is doing capoeira as well.

It also isn't really designed to be the most efficient method of messing a guy up.

TKD can fall in to this trap. Sport jujitsu falls into this trap.

The style will determine what you train. And that will effect your strengths and weakness's.

And people cross train for pretty much this reason.

Wait... Capoeira isn’t that effective? Then how do I dominate Tekken with Eddie Gordo? I beat karate, TKD, kung fu, Muay Thai, sumo, wrestling. Hell, I even beat a few bears, kangaroos, a log, and even this cyborg-zombie thing with a sword.

You’re telling me capoeira doesn’t dominate like Eddie Gordo does? You’re crazy.

 

[Flying Crane]

Wait... Capoeira isn’t that effective? Then how do I dominate Tekken with Eddie Gordo? I beat karate, TKD, kung fu, Muay Thai, sumo, wrestling. Hell, I even beat a few bears, kangaroos, a log, and even this cyborg-zombie thing with a sword.

You’re telling me capoeira doesn’t dominate like Eddie Gordo does? You’re crazy.

It depends on who is doing it and in what context and for what purpose.

Just like pretty much everything else. No shock there.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not really. You can train dumb stuff with resistance. Capoeira would be a prime example.

They train hard. Just what they train is not as efficient as say a combat sport.

They can get away with it because the other guy is doing capoeira as well.

It also isn't really designed to be the most efficient method of messing a guy up.

TKD can fall in to this trap. Sport jujitsu falls into this trap.

The style will determine what you train. And that will effect your strengths and weakness's.

And people cross train for pretty much this reason.

Agreed. It depends upon the level and kind of resistance offered. If one Capoeira-ist (I've forgotten the proper term for that) decides to do whatever he can to stop the other, the rota stops being a rota.

 

[drop bear]

Agreed. It depends upon the level and kind of resistance offered. If one Capoeira-ist (I've forgotten the proper term for that) decides to do whatever he can to stop the other, the rota stops being a rota.

And becomes vale tudo

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yes, but the term "criminal violence" specifically refers to the way criminals go about violence, which different from the way trained martial artist or 'street fighters' does.

A mugger will ask for directions (as an example) in order to disguise their real intent, and then when you are distracted giving them directions they will sucker punch you then steal your phone/wallet etc. They won't take up a fighting stance an offer to go three five minutes rounds with you with the winner going home with your belongings. A lot of MA's assume that engaging in a consensual fighting is the same as defending yourself from self criminal violence.

Case in point Drop Bear, who I don't even have to take off ignore to know has missed this point entirely and displayed his unwavering inability to distinguish between the two.

Here ended, today's lesson.

While I agree that there are some differences between consensual fighting and criminal violence, I think you're overstating the issue. A boxer (trained reasonably as most boxers are) is much better prepared for violence (criminal or consensual) than someone who trains specifically for self-defense, but too softly and/or with too little resistance. Take a boxer and also train him for some of the contextual differences, plus some of the non-physical defensive material, and he does even better. And that can be reversed, as well - take a good context-based defensive training system and add good resistive training, train it hard, and you also get someone who is well prepared (as well prepared as we can manage, in general).

Resistive training helps. Training for context helps. Training hard helps.

I'd argue you could maybe get away with losing any one of those, and still manage something useful. Lose two, and I have my doubts.

 

[Paul_D]

While I agree that there are some differences between consensual fighting and criminal violence, I think you're overstating the issue. A boxer (trained reasonably as most boxers are) is much better prepared for violence (criminal or consensual) than someone who trains specifically for self-defense

Someone who trains specifically for SD will (or should) practice preventing people closing the distance in order to set up a sucker punch. A boxer does not. A boxer probably hasn't even yet realised he's being interviews as a potential victim and that he is already in a SD situation.

I don't see how then someone who allows someone to get close enough to execute sucker punch, is better prepared to deal with violence than someone who is able to prevent a criminal for getting close enough to sucker punch them.

 

[jobo]

Someone who trains specifically for SD will (or should) practice preventing people closing the distance in order to set up a sucker punch. A boxer does not. A boxer probably hasn't even yet realised he's being interviews as a potential victim and that he is already in a SD situation.

I don't see how then someone who allows someone to get close enough to execute sucker punch, is better prepared to deal with violence than someone who is able to prevent a criminal for getting close enough to sucker punch them.

that's taking it to far, a boxer may well realise the danger, anyone with any,sense will be cautious if approach by someone out of the blue, the. Difference is a he boxer can do something about the punch if it comes
we have talk about this before you can't just punch everybody that comes with in range, what you can do is not be so relaxed that you can't react to danger if it happens.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Someone who trains specifically for SD will (or should) practice preventing people closing the distance in order to set up a sucker punch. A boxer does not. A boxer probably hasn't even yet realised he's being interviews as a potential victim and that he is already in a SD situation.

I don't see how then someone who allows someone to get close enough to execute sucker punch, is better prepared to deal with violence than someone who is able to prevent a criminal for getting close enough to sucker punch them.

If you cut off the quote to change the context, you lose the meaning. If that person who trained to maintain distance also never trained against a hard punch and violent entry, the fact that they still have space doesn't do much good, because a sucker punch might not be necessary.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

that's taking it to far, a boxer may well realise the danger, anyone with any,sense will be cautious if approach by someone out of the blue, the. Difference is a he boxer can do something about the punch if it comes
we have talk about this before you can't just punch everybody that comes with in range, what you can do is not be so relaxed that you can't react to danger if it happens.

And while the boxer might not maintain that distance (let's say they enter the monkey dance, rather than keeping distance), they would be faster to respond than the too-softly trained person, and would be less likely to be taken out of the fight by that sucker punch if it happens. And someone trained too softly, in spite of the training to keep distance, may not actually recognize the violence building.

 

[jobo]

And while the boxer might not maintain that distance (let's say they enter the monkey dance, rather than keeping distance), they would be faster to respond than the too-softly trained person, and would be less likely to be taken out of the fight by that sucker punch if it happens. And someone trained too softly, in spite of the training to keep distance, may not actually recognize the violence building.

yes all that, but it comes down to defintion, you can't sucker punch someone who is expecting it, that's said From the fact that most punches are telegraphed,haymakers and only trained fighters can throw devastating rights with little back lift,
if you get mugged by a decent boxer you are in trouble

 

[Gerry Seymour]

yes all that, but it comes down to defintion, you can't sucker punch someone who is expecting it, that's said From the fact that most punches are telegraphed,haymakers and only trained fighters can throw devastating rights with little back lift,
if you get mugged by a decent boxer you are in trouble

Agreed. I was referring to if the boxer (or the other subject) doesn't recognize that it's coming, so they still get a sucker punch.